← 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

Swaminath Baburao Patil, Solapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3) Solapur, Solapur

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

ITA 832/PUN/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.832/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Swaminath Baburao Patil, V The Income Tax Officer, C37, Siddheshwar Market S Ward-2(3), Solapur. Yard, Hyderabad Road, Solapur – 431005. Maharashtra. Pan: Akwpp4321P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule (Through Virtual Hearing) – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2025 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.2014-15 Dated 27.01.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act, Dated 19.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 153CSection 249(4)(a)Section 250Section 292B

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.2014-15 dated 27.01.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s

Ahmednagar Zilla Gramsevakanchi Sahakar Patsanstha Maryadit, Ahilyanagar vs. PCIT, Pune-1, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1301/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Ahmednagar Zilla Gramsevakanchi Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, 1, Opp. Sardar Patel Karyala, Behind Vs. Ketkar Hospital, Ahilyanagar-414001 The Pr. Cit, Pune-1 Pan : Aaaaa6582G अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Department By : Date Of Hearing : Date Of Pronouncement : Shri Prasad S Bhandari Shri Amol Khairnar 11-09-2025 25-11-2025 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.03.2025 Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pune-1 (“Pcit)” Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case, Respected Pcit Pune -1 Erred Passing The Impugned Revision Order Under Section 263 Without Appreciating The Fact That Interest On The Deposits Made By A Co-Operative Society With The Co-For Operative Bank Is Eligible Deduction Under Section 80P Of The Act. Hence, The Impugned Order Under Section 263 May Please Be Squashed. 2. On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case, Respected Pcit Pune 1 Erred Passing The Impugned Revision Order Under Section 263 Without Appreciating The Submission Made By The Assessee Society & The Judgments Of Hon'Ble Jurisdictional Pune

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Govindaswamy Vishnu Sankar Anand, Tirupur vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Tirupur

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

ITA 2416/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2416/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Govindaswamy Vishnu Sankar Anand, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 4/9, Kathir Nagar, 4Th Street, Ward 2(1), Kangeyam Road, Tirupur 614 604. Tirupur. [Pan:Adzpv5741R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.08.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Under Section 272A(1)(D) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (Virtual)
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143Section 272A(1)Section 272A(1)(d)

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.08.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19 under section 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. The assessee raised

M/S. Buhari Hotels and Motels Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Ward-1(3), Chennai

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

ITA 2413/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2413/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Buhari Hotels & Motels Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 6, Income Tax, Gandhi Irwin Road, Corporate Ward 1(3), Egmore 600 008. Chennai. [Pan:Aaecb4681M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Filed Any Adjournment Petition. Thus, The Assessee Called Absent & Set Exparte.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (virtual)

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed

Kali Durai, Kaiveli vs. ITO, Villupuram

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

ITA 2357/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2357/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kali Durai, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ravi Illam, No. 3, Mgr Street, Ward I, Villupuram. Thanthai Periyar Nagar, Kaiveli, Chennai 600 042. [Pan:Ccwpd7680C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Sonali Khatod, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 87 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit

For Appellant: Ms. Sonali Khatod, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (Virtual)
Section 144

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 87 days. The assessee filed