“NFAC”

Anilkumar Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(3)(6), Surat

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

different impugned orders dt. 18.03.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since all the issues involved in these two appeals are 2. common and identical, therefore, they

Anilkumar Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(3)(6), Surat

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

different impugned orders dt. 18.03.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since all the issues involved in these two appeals are 2. common and identical, therefore, they

Kumar Pratik, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Sahibganj

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Kumar Pratik, I.T.O., Tower C2, Flat 1402, Eden City, Sahibganj. Vs. Mahestala, Kolkata-700137. Pan No. Buapp 7990 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, A.M. 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 01/02/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The assessee has raised following grounds

Nih Sahay Utthansamiti, Madhubani vs. Income-Tax Officer (Exemption), Muzaffarpur

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

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act') for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Rekha Gupta, Motihari vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Muzaffarpur

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.81/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 1991-92 Rekha Gupta………..………….………………. …………………....Appellant Balua Tal, Motihari, East Champaran, Bihar-845401. [Pan: Adkpg6602P] Vs. Acit, Cc, Muzaffarpur………...……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.12.2024 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 1991-92. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Deriving Income From Business & Other Sources. During The Relevant Period, The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Sale Of Liquor On Wholesale & Retail Basis In The Proprietary Concern Styled As M/S Surya Enterprises. A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132(1) Of The Act Was Conducted At The Business Premises As Well As The Residential Premises Of The Assessee. Pursuant Thereto, An Assessment

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.12.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 1991-92. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Vijay Kumar, Samastipur vs. ITO, Ward 3 (3), Samastipur

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.79/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vijay Kumar………..………….………………. …………………....Appellant Kishanpur Warish Nagar, Samastipur, Bihar-848101. [Pan: Aqcpk3836C] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(3), Samastipur…....……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri G. P. Tulsiyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 08, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.01.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017–18 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹3,51,040. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment & Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Was Duly Issued. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noticed Cash Deposits Of ₹20,00,000 In The Assessee’S Bank Account. The Assessing Officer Provided Several

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.01.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Bhola Prasad, Gaya vs. Income Tax Officer, Gaya

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.339/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bhola Prasad..………………….………………. …………………....Appellant Manpur Ptwatoli Durga Asthan, Gaya, Bihar-823001.. [Pan: Auzpp5136D] Vs. Ito, Gaya…………..………..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Jitendra Kr. Sinha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.05.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Textile. For The Assessment Year 2017–18, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹3,10,520. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass On Account Of High-Value Cash Deposits During The Demonetisation Period, As Reported Through Third-Party Information. Notices Under Section 143(2) Followed By Notices Under Section 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Were Issued. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That Cash Deposits Aggregating To ₹97,64,000, Predominantly In

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.05.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Birju Kumar, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 4 (1), Patna

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.296/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Birju Kumar…………………….………………. …………………....Appellant Daulatpur Masaurhi, Patna, Bihar- 804452.. [Pan: Daspk0454F] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(1), Patna………..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.04.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee’S Case Was Reopened By Issuance Of Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Basis Of Information Received Through Form 26As / Statement Of Specified Financial Transactions (Sft) Under Section 285Ba(1), Indicating Cash Withdrawals Amounting To ₹1,07,38,557 During The Relevant Previous Year. The Assessee Did Not File Return Of Income In Response To The Notice Under Section 148. Thereafter, Notices Under Sections 142(1) & 143(2) Were Issued On Various Dates. Despite Issuance Of Statutory Notices, The Assessee Failed To Comply & Did Not

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.04.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Sanddep Tiwari, West Champaran vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Bettiah, West Champaran

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.255/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sandeep Tiwari..…………….………………. …………………....Appellant Vill: Alitolla, Po Thakraha, Via Nechua Jalalpur, West Champaran, Bettiah, Bihar- 841503.. [Pan: Apopt9064Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(5), Bettiah…....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singla, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 08, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.05.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That As Per Information Available On The Aims Module Of The Income-Tax Department, It Was Noticed That During The Period 09.11.2016 To 30.12.2016 (Demonetisation Period), The Assessee Had Made Cash Deposits Of ₹10,00,000 In His Bank Account Maintained With Bank Of India. Accordingly, Notice Under Section 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Along With A Questionnaire Was Issued. Since There Was Non-Compliance On The Part Of The Assessee, A Final

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.05.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Rajesh Kumar Sah, Muzaffarpur vs. ITO, Ward- 1 (1), Muzaffarpur

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.165/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar Sah.………….………………. …………………....Appellant C/O Harilal Prasad Navanagar, Nijamat, Karnowl, Sahebgunj, Muzaffarpur-843125. Bihar.. [Pan: Efwpk4178C] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Muzaffarpur…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri G. P. Tulsiyan, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.02.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Did Not File His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Consequently, Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act Was Issued. However, Even In Response To The Notice Under Section 148, The Assessee Failed To File The Return Of Income. During The Reassessment Proceedings, On Verification Of Bank Accounts, The Assessing Officer Noticed Cash Deposits Aggregating To ₹3,26,54,960, Which Were Treated As Unexplained Money Under Section

आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.02.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case are that

Nirmal Ramtani, Bhopal vs. DCIT-Central-1, Bhopal

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Yogesh Sood, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhopal

In the result we are of the considered opinion that the

Yogesh Sood ITA No. 424/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018. 2. Factual Matrix 2.1 That

Harish Chandra Purohit, Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer - 1, Ratlam

In the result- the Impugned order is set aside as and by way

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2018-19

appeal are independent and without prejudice to each other: Page 12 of 24 Harish Chandra Purohit A.Y. 2018-19 1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,64,000/-made by the Ld. AO on account of cash deposited in the bank account ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ['the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC'] has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre ('the Ld. AO') by upholding the addition

ACIT-1(1), Indore vs. Kriti Nutrients Limited, Indore

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

index from Sr. no. 1-16 which we reproduce as the Annexure A1 to Annexure P as below:- BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), NFAC, DELHI IN THE MATTER OF M/S. KRITI NUITRIENTS LIMITED. INDORE APPEAL NO. NFAC/SOSO-21/10209880-A.Y. 2021-22 S.No. Particulars Annexure 01) Specimen copies of sale invoices