← 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

Jonang Buddhist Educational Society, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Chandigarh

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1350/CHANDI/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Krinwant Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1350/Chd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2025-26) Jonang Buddhist Educational Commissioner Of Society Income बनाम/ C/O Tejmohan Singh, Advocate Tax Exemptions, Vs. #527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh 160011 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafaj-8024-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ : Sh. Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) Appellant By ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent : Sh. Manav Bansal (Cit) Dr By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of : 07- 01-2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Krinwant Sahay () Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.09.2025 Passed By The Ld.

For Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) DR by
Section 10ASection 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

assessee against the order dated 03.09.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Chandigarh [ herein referred to as IT(E)’ Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in law rejecting the approval sought under

Bhavnath Education Trust, Bavnagar vs. The ITO(Exemption) Ward, Bhavnagar

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

ITA 1559/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1559/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) बनाम/ Bhavnath Education Trust Income Tax Officer Bhanagar Highway, Dist. (Exemption) Vs. Bhavnagar, Ranghola- Ward, Bhavnagar 364230 / Aayakar Bhawan, Income Sanghavi & Company, Tax Office, Bhavanagar Prasham, 4Th Floor, Kasturba Road, Nr. Bilkha Plaza, Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb2003J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri M K Patel, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/01/2026 07/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 21.02.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... That the present appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT has been preferred against the order of the Hon'ble CIT(A), NFAC Delhi passed on 21/02/2025 confirming the order of the Ld. AO u/s 143(3) of the act vide which he has assessed the returned of Rs.1