“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cent Bank Home Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT/ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

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

ITA 198/IND/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanicent Bank Home Finance Dcit/Acit -1(1) Ltd. Bhopal 6Th Floor, Central Bank Of India Mmo Building Near Vs. Flora Fountain Hutatma Chowk M.G. Road, For Mumbai (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacc6380 N Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2023

Section 143Section 143(3)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

Shri Bhavesh Bhuva, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, ground No. 2(i) of the appeal is allowed

ITA 235/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.235/Srt/2022 (Ay 2012-13) (Hearing In Physical Court) Bhavesh Bhuva Income Tax Officer, C-51, Khodiyar Nagar Ward-3(3)(1), Surat, Income Vs Society, Nr. Chikoo Tax Office, Aaykar Bhavan, Wadi, Nana Varachha, Anavil Business Centre, Surat-395006 Hazira Road, Adajan, Pan No: Antpb 8989 P Surat-395007 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 29.05.2023 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 10.06.2022 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 26.11.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Bhavesh Bhuva “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Has Grossly Erred In Passing The Impugned Appellate Order On An Ex-Parte Basis, By Erroneously Holding That The Appellant Is Not Interested In Pursuing The Appeal, When The Fact Is That The Appellant Has Made Detailed Submissions In Form No.35 Itself, Which Ought To Have Been Considered By The Learned Cit(A), Nfac While Passing The Impugned Order. Therefore, The Appellate Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Being Passed On An Ex-Parte Basis, Needs To Be Quashed As Being Erroneous, Illegal & Bad-In-Law.

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- Bhavesh Bhuva “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), NFAC has grossly erred in passing the impugned appellate order on an ex-parte basis, by erroneously holding that the appellant is not interested in pursuing ... fact is that the appellant has made detailed submissions in Form No.35 itself, which ought to have been considered by the learned CIT(A), NFAC while passing the impugned order. Therefore, the appellate order of the learned CIT(A), NFAC being passed on an ex-parte basis, needs

Sharda Devi Katta, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(1), Jaipur

ITA 379/JPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs Monisha Choudhary, Addl.CIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred as “NFAC”] dated 26-08-2022 for the assessment year 2011-12 wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. “1.The impugned assessment order

Shharad M Jain, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) Income Tax Department Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

ITA 431/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Govind Menon

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69A

present appeal the Appellant has challenged the 1. order, dated 26/12/2022, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2013-14, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal

M/S. Kothari Trading Corporation, Mumbai vs. The ITO, WD-23(2)(6), (Erstwhil the Itc, WD-14(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 184/MUM/2023[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2023AY 1999-2000

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Govind Menon

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 80H

present appeal the Appellant has challenged the 1. order, dated 24/11/2022, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 1900-2000, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal

M/S General Fruit Traders, Jammu vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (1), Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 7/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 250oSection 28

ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi,[in brevity the ‘CIT (A)’], order passed u/s 250of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. I.T.A. No.7/Asr/2023 2 Assessment

Shri Hira Lal Kadlabju, Ghaziabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1, Jammu

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 28/ASR/2023[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 May 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.28/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2001-02

Section 143(3)Section 250oSection 69A

Anikesh Banerjee, JM: Both the appeals of the different assessee were filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi,[in brevity the ‘CIT (A)’], order passed u/s 250of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2001-02. The impugned order

Sh. Anish Bhan, Jammu vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Jammu

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 193/ASR/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 May 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.28/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2001-02

Section 143(3)Section 250oSection 69A

Smt. Prabha Khandelwal L/H of Late Omprakash Khandelwal, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bhilai, Durg

ITA 55/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 55/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Late Omprakash Khandelwal (Through Legal Heir:Smt.Prabha Khandelwal) B-107, Surya Residency, Opposite M.J. College Kohka Road, Bhilai(C.G.)-490023 Pan: Anspk3247N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri S.R.Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 30.03.2022, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. under Sec.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income ... following grounds of appeal: 1) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in upholding the re-assessment proceeding initiated u/s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2) In the facts and circumstances of the case

Keshnath Sahu, Dhamtari vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari, Dhamtari

ITA 135/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.135/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Keshnath Sahu Shri Balaji Construction Company, Near Power House, Kathuriya Complex, Ratnabandha Road, Dhamtari (C.G)-493 773 Pan : Cqips0706B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 69

present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 14.03.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. under Sec. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income

Garuda Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 133/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 133/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Garuda Vyapaar Private Limited G-02, Maruti Lifestyle, Kota, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaccg7149C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Prahlad Kori, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 103/RPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.102 & 103/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Prahlad Kori, Gali No.6, Behind Taiyyab Masjid, Bharatiya Nagar, Bilaspur-495 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aywpk4060C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the respective orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 14.02.2023, which in turn arises from the orders passed by the A.O. under Sec. 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

Prahlad Kori, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 102/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: S/shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

Smt. Ushaben Varma, Jamnagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 69/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot26 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69A

Revision order dated 07.03.2022 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “NFAC”), arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 I.T.A No. 69/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 Page

Vijay Hiralal Rajput, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(9) Old/ 3(2)(6) New, Surat

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

ITA 96/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)

hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 27.12.2019. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- Vijay H Rajput “1. Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and on facts to confirm Assessing Officer's addition in part to estimate gross commission receipts at 1.50% (as against ... assessee gross commission income at Rs.5,93,557/- over and above commission income declared by the appellant at Rs.7,19,222/-. 2.Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on fact to confirm AO's working of 2 percent commission income on total banking transaction of all banks worked

Atul Taksali, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 80/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Atul Taksali (Self)For Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Alsisar Hotels & Resorts Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 135/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: The Due Date Of The Filing Of Return During The Year. 2. That The Petitioner Raves To Add, Alter Or Amend All Or Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal On Or Before The Due Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Rathore (C.A.)For Respondent: None a

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short ‘’NFAC’’), Delhi dated 31.01.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following ground:- “That the ACIT Circle-3, Jaipur erred in disallowing ... made disallowance of Rs. 2,82,166/- towards employee’s contribution towards ESI and PF. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC has confirmed the disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employee’s contribution of PF/ESI within the prescribed due dates

Braham Parkash Yadav, Bhiwadi, Alwar vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 439/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Kumar Garg (C.A.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Years : 2020-21 Bramah Prakash Yadav cuke Commissioner Income Vs. B-40, Bhagat Singh Colony Tax(Appeals), Bhiwadi, Alwar-301019. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABUPY 7003 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Praveen ... account of disallowance of expenditure indicated in the Audit Report u/s 143(1)(a)(iv). The same is decided against the assessee by the NFAC.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2020-21 declaring total income

Sodhani Sweet Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 383/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Khandelwal (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

made disallowance of Rs. 13,88,920/- towards employee’s contribution towards ESI and PF. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC has confirmed the disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employee’s contribution of PF/ESI within the prescribed due dates

Catwalk Worldwide Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst. Direcotr of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 685/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2019-20 Catwalk Worldwide Acit, Pvt Ltd, Cpc, Bangalore Unit No. 405-408, Tanti A Jogani Industrial Premises, Vs. Jr Boricha Marg, Sitaram Mill Compound, Lower Parel, Maharashtra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccc1276B

For Appellant: Mr. Nimesh Vora & Moksha MehtaFor Respondent: Mr. K. C. Selvamani, CIT DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

referred to as ‘the assessee’) by filing the present appeals, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 10.01.2023 passed National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] qua the assessment year 2019-20 on the grounds inter-alia that :- “On the facts