← 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

Sonalben Amitkumar Rana, Panchamahal vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 1, Baroda

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1986/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1986/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sonalben Amitkumar Rana The Dcit बनाम/ Jawaharbag Vardhari Road Central Circle-1 V/S. Lunawada Baroda Panchmahal – 389 230 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Cdjpr 1439 L (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 250

present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 16/09/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment ... Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 2. #&थ% / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु' अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi 5. िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. , , 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt

Premilaben Bhavuji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward - 3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1944/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1943 & 1944/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Premilaben Bhavuji Thakor The Ito बनाम/ A/67, Dwarkapuri Mafalipur Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Dholka Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmdabad – 382 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aynpt 8295 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pritesh Shah, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] of even date 28/07/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 2. #&थ% / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु' अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण 5. अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. , , गाड" फाईल / 6. Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt

Premilaben Bhavuji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward - 3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1943/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1943 & 1944/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Premilaben Bhavuji Thakor The Ito बनाम/ A/67, Dwarkapuri Mafalipur Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Dholka Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmdabad – 382 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aynpt 8295 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pritesh Shah, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] of even date 28/07/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 2. #&थ% / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु' अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण 5. अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. , , गाड" फाईल / 6. Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt

Rajkamal Agro Industries, Deesa vs. ITO, Ward 1, Palanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1853/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1853/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rajkamal Agro Industries The Ito बनाम/ Deesa Palanpur Highway Ward-I V/S. At Rasna, Deesa – 385 535 Palanpur 385 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaifr 7263 C (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 04/09/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-2016. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal, Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250

present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 04/09/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment ... Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 2. #&थ% / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु' अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi. 5. िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. , , 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt

Rashmikant Bhaichandbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1112/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2021-22 Rashmikant Bhaichandbhai The Ito बनाम/ Shah Ward-5(3)92) V/S. 31, Jain Society Ahmedabad – 380 015 Pritamnagar, Akhada Ellisbridge Ahmedabad – 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afgps 3047 E (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Revenue By : Smt.Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)Section 80G

present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 27/02/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment ... Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 2. #&थ% / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT. आयकर आयु' अपील 4. ( ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi. 5. िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. , , 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt

Srirangarao Nadipallly, Karimnagar vs. ACIT., Circle-1, Karimnagar

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

ITA 844/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.844/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Srirangarao Nadipally Vs. Assistant Commissioner Karimnagar Of Income Tax Pan:Acbpn3816E Circle-1, Karimnagar (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Adv. Kvssn Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sankar Pandi P - Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Srirangarao Nadipally (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24.03.2025 For The A.Y 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Adv. KVSSN KumarFor Respondent: Sankar Pandi P - Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Shri Srirangarao Nadipally (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 24.03.2025 for the A.Y 2016-17. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Page