← 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

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT, TDS Circle, Panaji

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 170/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] challenges respective separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. NFAC’] u/s 250 of ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 30 Union Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 the Act involving three assessment years ... Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 deduction of TDS and imposition of interest in appeal before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(ha) of the Act, but remained unsuccessful. 4.6 Aggrieved by the separate orders of Ld. NFAC passed

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT, TDS Circle, Panaji

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 169/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] challenges respective separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. NFAC’] u/s 250 of ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 30 Union Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 the Act involving three assessment years ... Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 deduction of TDS and imposition of interest in appeal before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(ha) of the Act, but remained unsuccessful. 4.6 Aggrieved by the separate orders of Ld. NFAC passed

Asif Abdulhak Soudagar, Kumta vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -2, Karwar, Karawar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 145/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.145/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Asif Abdulhak Soudagar, National E – Vs Soudagar Chicken Centre, Assessment Centre, . Old Fish Market Road, Delhi-110001. Kumta, . Uttarakannada-581343, Karnataka. Pan: Diyps8481L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

Jagdish Kumar Mahto, Ranchi vs. Ranchi Commissioner, Ranchi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 50/RAN/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi14 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.50/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jagdish Kumar Mahto….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant Mukhiya House, Kanke Road Ranchi, Konge, Kanke Road, S.O Jharkhand-834008. [Pan: Acnpm5004H] Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-1, Ranchi...................................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 25.1.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 147Section 148Section 250

order : January 14, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 25.1.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Ranchi vs. Dukhharan Memorial Charitable Trust, Ranchi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 261/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.261/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ito, Exemption Ward, Ranchi ….…………….……...................……….……Appellant Vs. Dudhharan Memorial Charitable Trust.…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Rani Hospital Behind Machlighar Booty Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834001. [Pan: Aactd1772A] Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 20.03.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 250

order : January 14, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 20.03.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Rajiv Goyal, Patiala, Punjab vs. Jao ITO Ward-3, Patiala

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 481/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: the CIT(A) have not been considered properly.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR (Virtual Mode)
Section 115BSection 68Section 69

Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश/Order PER KRINWANT SAHAY, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dt. 19/02/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. In the present appeal, Assessee has raised the following grounds: "1. That

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh vs. Frontier Agrotech Private Limited, Chandigarh

ITA 388/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: The Appeal Is Heard Or Is Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144B

Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A),NFAC, Delhi dt. 07/01/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. In the present appeal Revenue has raised the following grounds: i) Whether

Smt. Raj Bala, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1142/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 2. That the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). NFAC is erroneous, arbitrary, opposed to law and facts of the case and is, thus, untenable. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax(Appeals

Balu Vithal Pawale, Pune vs. ITO WD- 2(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2869/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2869/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Balu Vithal Pawale, V Assessing Officer, Village-Kasarsai, S National Faceless Taluka-Mulsi, Assessment Centre, Dist-Pune – 410506. Delhi Pan:Bfcpp7170L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand-Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 08/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 16.10.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 27.03.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 144BSection 147rSection 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2017-18 dated 16.10.2024 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147r.w.s

Kishor Vitthal Kolhe, Jalgaon vs. DCIT-Circle-1, Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1876/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kawadia (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

PANDA, V.P: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.06.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order ... NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.64,94,250/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assesse is an individual and engaged in the business

Chandrashekhar Vishnu Paranjpe (HUF), Pune vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 1587/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora andFor Respondent: Shri Madhan Thirmanpalli, Addl.CIT
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.04.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2015-16. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an HUF and filed his return ... made addition of Rs.36,12,651/- to the total income of the assessee as long term capital gain. 5. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee challenged the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the Assessing Officer did not follow the principles of natural justice

U B Foods Pvt. Ltd, Jalgaon vs. ITO, Ward1(2), Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 986/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.986/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 U B Foods Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, D 33 Midc, Audyogik Vashat, S. Ward-1(2), Jalgaon. Jalgaon S.O, Jalgaon – 425003. Pan: Aabcu1322K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde-Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 01/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 03.05.2024 Emanating From The Separate Assessment Orders Under Section 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, 1961 Dated 25.05.2023 For The A.Y.2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 69A

आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 03.05.2024 emanating from the separate assessment orders under section 147 read with section 144B

DCIT, Circle 7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Hkc Techind Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 747/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.747/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata Vs Hkc Techind Private Limited, 9Th Floor, Shantiniketan, 8, Camac Street, Kolkata-17 Pan No. :Aaach 6407 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt.Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 22.08.2024 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Delayed By 159 Days For Which The Revenue Has Filed Petition For Condonation Which Reads As Follows :-

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. The appeal filed by the revenue is delayed by 159 days for which the revenue has filed petition

Renu Bothra, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 46, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2687/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR
Section 56(2)(x)

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 11.09.2025, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the assessee had purchased property for a consideration of Rs.64

Mallik Sakila, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 25(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2532/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2532/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Mallik Sakila………………….…………………....…………………....Appellant Lawgical Consultants, 29D, Bentick Street, Unit-A,B & C, 3Rd Floor, Kol-1. [Pan: Hdops3871K] Vs. Ito, Ward-25(1), Kolkata..……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Avijit Dey, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit - Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 13, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026

Section 143(2)Section 250

order : January 14, 2026 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 09.09.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Devansh Trade Link Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2451/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2451/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Devansh Trade Link Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito Ward-2(1) Kolkata 2Nd Floor, Room No.6A, 19 Gc Avenue, Dharmatala, So Kolkata West Bengal-700013 Pan No. :Aaccd 7209 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Ray & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.08.2025, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. It Was The Submission That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte Without Affording Sufficient Opportunity Of Being Heard. It Was Also Submitted That The Assessee May Be Given One More Opportunity To Represent Its Case Before The Ld. Cit(A), So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Provide The Details Before The Ld. Cit(A) To Substantiate Its Case. 3. In Reply, Ld. Sr.Dr Supported The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) & The Ld. Ao. 4. We Have Considered The Rival Submissions. A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Clearly Shows That The Ld.Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte. However, During The Course Of Hearing, The Financial Controller Of The Assessee, Who Appeared In Person, Requested

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Ray & Shri Trideep Nayak, ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 26.08.2025, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2014-2015. 2. It was the submission that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 30(1), Kolkata vs. Sarojesh Chandra Mukherjee, Tollygunge

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2296/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2296/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Ito, Ward-30(1), Kolkata Vs Sarojesh Chandra Mukherjee 74/1B, Golf Residency, Uday Shankar Sarani Tollygunge, Kolkata-700033 Pan No. :Aejpm 5031 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Agarwal, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 14.08.2025 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted Vide The Cbdt Circular No. 9/2024 Dated 17.09.2024, The Monetary Limits For Filing Of Appeal By The Department Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal & High Courts & Slp Before Supreme Court Have Been Increased As A Measure For Reducing Litigation. The Revised Monetary Limits Laid Down In Para-2 Of This Circular Are As Follows: 1. Before Appellate Tribunal : Rs. 60,00,000/- 2. Before High Court : Rs. 2,00,00,000/- 3. Before Supreme Court : Rs. 5,00,00,000/- 3. In The Present Case, The Tax Effect In The Revenue'S Appeal Is Less Than Rs.60,00,000/-. Since The Tax Effect Is Below The Monetary Limit For Filing Appeals Before Tribunal, In View Of The Circular Of Cbdt (Supra) At The First Place, Revenue Should Not Have Preferred This Appeal. In View Of The Above

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 14.08.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2012-2013. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted vide the CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 dated

Santosh Kumar Gupta, Kolkata vs. ITO Ward 47(1) Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2295/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2295/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Santosh Kumar Gupta, Vs Ito Ward-47(1), Kolkata 12, Golam Abbas Lane, Salakia, Howrah, West Bengal-711106 Pan No. :Alipg 9111 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Kumar Varma, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.09.2025 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Ramesh Kumar Gupta, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Was Not In Uniform. As The Said Authorized Representative Is Not In Uniform The Matter Is Heard Ex-Parte & As The Matter Is Being Heard Ex- Pare, The Appeal Is Being Dismissed. 3. In The Result, Appeal Of The Assessee Is Dismissed. Order Dictated & Pronounced In The Open Court On 14/01/2026. (जाजज माथन) (George Mathan) न्यानयक सदस्य /कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 14/01/2026 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar Varma, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 23.09.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Ramesh Kumar Gupta, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee was not in uniform. As the said

Subir Kumar Ghosh, New Town vs. ITO, Ward 42(1), Murshidabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2147/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2147/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Subir Kumar Ghosh, Vs Ito Ward-42(1), Murshidabad Flat No.G-303, Block-G, Rail Vihar, New Town, Action Area 1A, Rajarhat North 24 Parganas, Wb-700163 Pan No. :Adlpg 1306 R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Thard, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri J.M.Thard, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. The Ld.AR drew my attention to the reasons recorded along with the sanctions from pages

Hotels Diamond Glory Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2120/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2120/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Hotels Diamond Glory Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata 96A, Raja Ram Mohan Sarani Amherst Street, Kolkata-700009 Pan No. :Aacch 1629 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Prof. Jayant Nitra, Finance Controller Of The Assessee राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.07.2025 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. It Was The Submission That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte Without Affording Sufficient Opportunity Of Being Heard. It Was Also Submitted That The Assessee May Be Given One More Opportunity To Represent Its Case Before The Ld. Cit(A), So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Provide The Details Before The Ld. Cit(A) To Substantiate Its Case. 3. In Reply, Ld. Sr.Dr Supported The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) & The Ld. Ao. 4. We Have Considered The Rival Submissions. A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Clearly Shows That The Ld.Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte. However, During The Course Of Hearing, The Financial Controller Of The Assessee, Who Appeared In Person, Requested

For Appellant: Prof. Jayant Nitra, Finance Controller of the assesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 21.07.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. It was the submission that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without