“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

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs. Bhaveshkumar Girishbhai Bhandari, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

ITA 979/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs. Bhaveshkumar Girishbhai Bhandari, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed and the order of

ITA 978/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

established, the burden stood discharged and no addition under section 68 was warranted. The assessee also referred to the order of the CIT(A), NFAC in Pranav Mahendrabhai Patel v. ITO (ITA No. NFAC/2016-17/10118737, order dated 12.12.2023), where on identical facts involving the same scrip Kushal Tradelink Ltd., the addition ... Appeals) in the appellate order. The ld. counsel for the assessee also placed reliance on the decision of order of the CIT(A), NFAC in Pranav Mahendrabhai Patel v. ITO (ITA No. NFAC/2016- 17/10118737, order dated 12.12.2023), where on identical facts involving the same scrip Kushal Tradelink Ltd., the addition

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs. Girishkumar Amratlal Bhandari HUF, Himatnagar, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed and the order of

ITA 977/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Gitaben Dineshbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 717/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshatriya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 11.03.2025 passed for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts ... related to the assessee. The assessee also drew attention to a decision in a comparable case of her close relative, Pranav Mahendrabhai Patel v. NFAC, Delhi (ITA No. 10118737/A.Y. 2017-18, dated 12.12.2023), wherein under identical facts and circumstances, the addition made under section 68 in respect of sale

Viva Style and Fashion (India) Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1)(1), Old Ward 4(1)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 579/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 69

/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 10-02- 2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well

Mahadev Infracon, Ahmedabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir 3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 477/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Srivastav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 31-12- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “a. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order

Arhamgachchh Sthanakvasi Jain Sampraday Trust, Ahmedabad vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 409/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.409/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : Na Arhamgachchh Sthanakvasi The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Jain Sampraday Trust Vejalpur 380 015 V/S. 1, Paras Chambers, Opp. Sagar Hotel Nr. Ujala Circle, Sarkhej Ahmedabad – 382 210 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaeta 9012 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kamal Bhambhani, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.P. Rastogi, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: 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 24/12/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Bhambhani, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)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 24/12/2024 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. The assessee ... short time frame. In support, the ld. counsel for the assessee reliance placed reliance on the decisions in Rahim Saib Hiriyur Hyder Ali v. NFAC [2022] 145 taxmann.com 116 (Karnataka), where a two-day response period was held to be violative of natural justice, and Uday Desai HUF v. NFAC

Navneetbhai Ramanlal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 223/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.223/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Navneetbhai Ramanlal Patel The Ito बनाम/ 19, New Ambica Park Society Ward-2(1)(2) V/S. D Cabin Sabarmati Ahmedabad – 380 051 Ahmedabad – 380 019 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aqzpp 2479 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hiren Trivedi, Ar Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: 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 14/10/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-2017. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Trivedi, ARFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

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 14/10/2024 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment ... raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. In law and in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT (Appeal) NFAC has passed the appellate order without providing video hearing as provided in Faceless Appeals Scheme more particularly when Appellant has stated that proper opportunity

Sobransingh Tahrasrih Parihar, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1704/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 270ASection 37Section 40

NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short “the CIT(A)”) dated 11.07.2025 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2020-21 in the proceeding under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income

Master Handlom House, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1561/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Gohil, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR

Section 250Section 69A

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short) dated 23.05.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

Gujarat Informatics Limited, Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle- Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1365/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Urjit H. RavatFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 250Section 67A

/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 16-04- 2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. Section 14A read with rule 8D and Section 250; That

Ishwarbhai Gordhanbhai Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Office Ward 3(3)(5) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1344/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, ARFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr.DR

Section 250Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 56(2)(x)

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 21/05/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the Assessment ... passed by the learned Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. CIT (Appeals)'], Income tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) presents this appeal against the same on the following amongst other grounds: 1. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in facts

Hiralben Ravibhai Kshatriya, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1321/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalhiralben Ravibhai Kshatriya, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 32, Amidhara Society, Ward-4(1)(1), Bopal Daskrol, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380058. [Pan :Cxvpk9950 M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Parin S Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Ravindra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Parin S Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271ASection 69

reopening of Assessing u/s.148 of the Act is bad in law and required to be quashed. Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2– 3. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming reopening of assessment without observing escapement merely for verification purpose. 4. Ld. NFAC erred ... facts in confirming addition of Rs.3761920/- u/s.69 of the Act by treating same as unexplained investment ignoring submission of appellant. 5. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in not passing order as per the provision of section 250(6) of the Act. 6. Ld. NFAC ought to have

Bhoomi Manas Bhatt, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1208/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 69ASection 69C

SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short “the CIT(A)”) dated 18.03.2025 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2015-16 in the proceeding under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income

Nirbhay Consultants Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1980/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 09-11- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “Your appellant being aggrieved by the order passed & confirmed ... Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) u/s 250 of the income Tax Act 1961 (“the Act”) presents this appeal against the same on the following grounds: I.T.A No. 1980/Ahd/2024 Nirbhay Consultants Pvt. Ltd., A.Y. 2011-12 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the reopening

Savli Taluka Secondary and Higher Secondary Employees Co Op. Credit Society Limited, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 1772/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1772/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Savli Taluka Secondary & The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Higher Secondary Employees Ward-1(2)(2) V/S. Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd. Vadodara – 390 007 18, Rayakaka Park Savli Desar Road Vadodara – 391 770. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aafas 6647 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket Bakshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Sr.DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 272(1)(d)Section 68

Karansinh Patel, Dahod vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Dahod

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1566/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 30-07- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “(1) That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC ... ΛΟ has grievously erred in not fully considering the replies/ submissions filed by appellant. (2) That on facts and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in partly confirming addition of Rs. 21, 90, 289/- out of Rs.40,94,553/- made

Income-Tax Officer, Palanpur vs. Siddharth Satishbhai Joshi, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1324/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), dated 08.05.2024, under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

Chamunda Electrical Private Limited, Palanpur vs. Circle Palanpur, Palanpur

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

ITA 846/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40Section 40a

/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 30-08- 2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law as well

Anil Kumar Dundoo, Secunderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-10(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1259/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: your Honours on 4th November 2025.

Section 143(3)

present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi, dated 06/06/2025, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, 2 Anil Kumar Dundoo vs ACIT “A.O.”) under Section