← All Phrases

“NFAC”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144BSection 144B48,618 judgments

The decision most relied on for NFAC is Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (174 Taxmann.com 1203), cited in 43 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on NFAC

Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
174 Taxmann.com 1203 · 2025 · High Court
43
citing judgments

Where the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) and the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) have concurrent jurisdiction, a notice issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is valid, provided no prejudice is caused to the assessee.

Aggarwal v. NFAC
127 Taxmann.com 637 · High Court
34
citing judgments

Denying a personal hearing when specifically requested, especially after a search and during a pandemic, violates the principles of natural justice. The assessment and appellate proceedings themselves were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hire Purchase (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC
128 Taxmann.com 190 · High Court
34
citing judgments

Failure to grant a personal hearing to an assessee when income is likely to be varied based on submitted evidence violates the principles of natural justice and renders the assessment order invalid.

Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP v. NFAC
142 Taxmann.com 38 · 2022 · High Court
32
citing judgments

When initiating penalty proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) must specify the limb of the charge, indicating whether the penalty is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This requirement is essential for valid penalty proceedings.

Vinodkumar Lakshmipathi v. CIT (Appeals) NFAC
145 Taxmann.com 235 · 2022 · ITAT
21
citing judgments

The ITAT held that failure to file Form 67 by the due date for filing the return of income is not fatal to the claim for foreign tax credit. The appellate authority can condone the delay in filing Form 67.

Alrameez Construction (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC
152 Taxmann.com 382 · 2023 · ITAT
14
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 270A for under-reporting or mis-reporting of income cannot be sustained if additions are made under Section 56(2)(x) and the penalty notice fails to specify the limb under which proceedings are initiated.

Sanjay Gupta v. CIT
366 ITR 18 · 2014 · High Court
13
citing judgments

When the quantum of income is remanded to the Assessing Officer, the issue of penalty for undisclosed income should also be remanded to the Assessing Officer.

Saltwater Studio LLP v. NFAC
157 Taxmann.com 749 · 2023 · Reported
11
citing judgments

A penalty levied for misreporting under section 270A is unsustainable if the Assessing Officer fails to establish how the assessee's case falls within the specific instances of misreporting mentioned in section 270A(9). This requires an application of mind and adherence to the principles of natural justice.

Judgments citing NFAC

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 222/VIZ/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

I.T.A.No.221-223/Viz/2022, A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16 11. The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16. Since the grounds raised in these appeals are common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 221/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

I.T.A.No.221-223/Viz/2022, A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16 11. The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16. Since the grounds raised in these appeals are common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 81/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

I.T.A.No.221-223/Viz/2022, A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16 11. The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16. Since the grounds raised in these appeals are common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 80/VIZ/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

I.T.A.No.221-223/Viz/2022, A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16 11. The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the A.Y.2013-14 to 2015-16. Since the grounds raised in these appeals are common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and a common

Shree Madhi Surali Vibhag Nagrik Sahakari Dhiran Mandali Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -2(3), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 141/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.141/Srt/2023 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Physical Court) Shree Madhi Surali Vibhag Deputy Commissioner Of Nagri Sahakari Dhiran Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Vs Mandali Ltd., At & P.O( Surat Aaykar Bhavan, Madhi, Tal. Bardoli, Majura Gate, Surat- Surat-395006 395002 Pan No: Aadas 5644 L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Yogesh S. Gamit, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal Instituted On 22.02.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 21.04.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 15.06.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 23.12.2022 For Assessment Year 2014-15, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Dcit, Circle-2(3), Surat / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 16.11.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Shree Madhi Surali Vibhag Nagrik Sahakari Dhiran Mandali Ltd. “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Nfac, Delhi [Here-In-After Referred To As Ld. Cit(Appeals)] Was Not Justified & Grossly Erred By Without Considering The Facts, Legal Cases & Documents Submitted By The Appellant. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Was Not Justified & Grossly Erred In Confirming The Action Of The A.O Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The I.T Act 1961 Which Is Incomplete & Also Bad On Facts.

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Nagrik Sahakari Dhiran Mandali Ltd. “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [here-in-after referred to as Ld. CIT(Appeals)] was not justified and grossly erred by without considering the facts, legal cases and documents

Manish Bachubhai Dani, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 873/MUM/2023[20122-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2023

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanmanish Bachubai Dani Nfac, No-245-A, 702, Prakash Tower, North Block, बनाम/ Opp Raja Hotel, New Delhi, Vs. Shankarrao Chowk, Delhi-110001. Kalyan(W)- 421301, Maharashtra. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabhm0031L (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) Ito, Ward 3(2), Manish Bachubai 2Ndfloor,Ranimansion, Dani बनाम/ Murbad Road, 702, Prakash Tower, Vs. Kalyan(W)-421301, Opp Raja Hotel, Maharashtra. Shankarrao Chowk, Kalyan(W)- 421301, Maharashtra "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabhm0031L (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DRFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Manish Bachubai Dani NFAC, No-245-A, 702, Prakash Tower, North Block, बनाम/ Opp Raja Hotel, New Delhi, Vs. Shankarrao Chowk, Delhi-110001. Kalyan(W)- 421301, Maharashtra. "थायी लेखा सं ... 1022/Mum/2023. Manish Bachubhai Dani, Mumbai The Cross Appeal is filed by the assessee and revenue against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / CIT(A), Mumbai. ITA No. 873/Mum/2023, A.Y 2012-13. (Assessee Appeal) The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Addition of Rs.1

May Fashions LLP, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2073/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2073/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) May Fashions Llp बिधम/ Cit(A)/Nfac Anup Anand Compartments New Delhi Vs. Plot No. 24-25 Marol Co- Op, Indl Estate Andhri Kurla Road, Sakinaka, Andheri, Mumbai-400059. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abefm7603C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 31/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 23.09.2021 For Ay. 2019-20. 2. It Is Noted That This Caption Appeal Was Allowed In The First Round By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 09.05.2022. However, The Same Has Been Recalled In Ma No. 338/Mum/2022 In The Light Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Decision In The Case Of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cit (448 Itr 518). Therefore, This Appeal Is Adjudicated Afresh. The Main Grievance Of Assessee Is Against The Action Of Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Disallowance Of Employee’S Contribution Made Towards Pf/Esi To The Tune Of Rs.5,40,279/-.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, AM