“NFAC”

ITO Ward 4(1)(3) Aligarh, Aligarh vs. Indu Gold & Dimond Pvt.Ltd, Aligarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM, This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 09.03.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/ CIT(A) pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18 arising out of Assessment ITA No.- 283/Agr/2025 Indu gold & Diamond Pvt. Ltd. Order u/s 143(3) r.w.s

Shri Rani Sati Foods and Grains Private Limited, Ranchi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.10.2023 for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Rajib Jain, ld. CIT- DR appeared on behalf

Patel Minerals, Jamshedpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Chaibasa

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

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 24.03.2025 for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. It was submitted by the ld AR that admittedly in the assessment proceedings the assessee had not provided

Jharkhand State Bar Council, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Ranchi

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayjharkhand State Bar Council, I.T.O., Bunglow No. 8, North Office Para, Ward 1(1), Vs. Doranda, Ranchi-834002. Ranchi. Pan No. Aacaj 0989 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10234810 dated 12/11/2024 for the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. Shri M.K. Chowdhary, ld. AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Khubchand T. Pandya

Deb Prasad Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Jamshedpur

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

above captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.01.2024, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR fairly stated that the assessee has chosen to file an application

Jitender Singh, Arwal vs. ITO, Dhanbad

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

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 28.11.2024 for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Rajib Jain, ld. CIT-DR appeared

Akshay Kumar, Jamshedpur vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Jamshedpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayakshay Kumar, I.T.O., 3/B, Subhash Colony, Dimna Road, Ward-1(1), Vs. Jamshedpur, Jharkhand-831012. Jamshedpur. Pan No. Bappk 6029 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10293338 dated 25/09/2024 for the A.Y. 2018-19 2. Shri Aditya Mohan Khandelwal, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Khubchand T Pandya, Sr.DR appeared

Sukun Vincom Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Ranchi

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.37/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Sukun Vincom Private Limited Vs. Ito, Ward-1(2), Ranchi 9, Lal Bazar Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal-700001 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aapcs 2490 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rajib Jain, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit- Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. We Have Considered The Submissions Of The Ld. Cit-Dr. Admittedly, The Assessee Has Not Represented Its Case Before The Ld. The Ao Nor Provided Any Details With Regard To Its Claim. In Absence Of Genuineness Of Transaction, Creditworthiness & Verification Of Source Of Funds, The Could Not Verify The Investments Made In Unlisted Equities During The Period Under Consideration. As Mentioned Earlier, These Are Basically Ex-Parte Order Before The Ao. This Being So, In The Interest Of Justice & So As To Grant The Assessee Opportunity To Substantiate Its Case, The Issues In This Appeal Are Restored To The File Of The Ld. Ao For Readjudication On Merits After Granting The Assessee Adequate Opportunity Of Being Heard. The Assessee Is Also Directed To Produce The Directors Of The Company (Sellers) To Substantiate The Identity, Creditworthiness & Source Of Funds & Transactions Made On Unlisted Equities. 4. In The Result, Appeal Of The Assessee Is Partly Allowed For Statistical Purposes.

Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 15.12.2023 for the assessment year 2015-2016. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Rajib Jain, ld. CIT- DR appeared on behalf

Nikit Kumar Mittal, Bokaro vs. National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the Id.CIT(A). Even before the Id.CIT(A) the assessee did not comply on the various dates, therefore, the Id. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal stating that since the impugned passed by the Id. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order without looking into the merits of the case, therefore, another opportunity may be given to the assessee by setting aside the order

above captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.07.2024, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. In the present case of the assessee, the assessment order was framed u/s.144 of the Act by making

Md Hasnain Ansari, Jamshedpur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Jamshedpur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

above captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.07.2024, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual during the assessment year in question

Service Housing Cooperative Society Ltd., Ranchi vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Ranchi

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

Bench: the learned CIT(A). However, the appeal was dismissed, sustaining the assessment order, absence of supporting documents.5. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. At the time of hearing also, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee to substantiate the grounds. We have, however, heard the learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. The learned DR supported the orders of the authorities below, stating that repeated non- compliance

passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative

Kunti Devi, Jharkhand vs. CIT (A), NFAC

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, AM (THROUGH HYBRID MODE) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.294/RAN/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Kunti Devi, Vs. CIT(A) NFAC H.No.42, Makatpur, PS No.95, Giridh-815301, Jharkhand स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : BMGPD 9549 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee ... above captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 04.10.2023, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2014-2015. 2. In the present case of the assessee, the assessment order was passed u/s.143

Arun Kumar Singh, Ranchi vs. DCIT Circle-1, Dhanbad

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

BENCH 1. These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 17/12/2023, 12/12/2023 and 17/11/2023 for the A.Y. 2016-17, 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee

Arun Kumar Singh, Ranchi vs. DCIT Circle-1, Dhanbad

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

BENCH 1. These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 17/12/2023, 12/12/2023 and 17/11/2023 for the A.Y. 2016-17, 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee

Arun Kumar Singh, Ranchi vs. DCIT Circle-1, Dhanbad

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

BENCH 1. These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 17/12/2023, 12/12/2023 and 17/11/2023 for the A.Y. 2016-17, 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee

Shri Durga Gram Service Co Operative Society Limited Merhana, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward Bilaspur, Bilaspur

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.535/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Durga Gram Service Co-Operative Society Limited Village: Merhana Ghumarwin, Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh-174 028 Pan: Aagas5856D

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Bharat Lal Tahalyani, Janjgir-Nalia, Janjhgir-Nalia vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 479/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2016-17)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी पाथ" सारथी चौधर", "ाियक सद

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department vs. Navinchandra Veljibhai Shahq, Jamnagar

In the result, the appellant's appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.401/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) The Income Tax Officer, Wd – Vs. Navinchandra Veljibhai Shah 1(3), Income Tax Department, Ramesh Stores Samkrit Building, Room No. 209, Aayakar Bhavan, Street No. 11, Kamdar Colony Jamnagar – 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Basps6529R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2025 Dates Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN

Ratanshi, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Morbi

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

ITA No.171/Rjt/2024 (AY-17-18) Ratanshi G Bhut आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोट न्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Gaya vs. Pawan Kumar Singh, Rohtas

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2016-17 Ito, Ward-3(1), Gaya…………..…………....…….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Pawan Kumar Singh…………..…..………………….....……...…..…..Respondent C/O Vidhayanchal Singh, Tarhangla, Dehri-On-Sone, Bihar – 821307. [Pan: Aqsps7942P] Appearances By: Shri Anuj Ganguli, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 09, 2025 Order Per Madhumita Roy: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.01.2025 Passed By Nfac U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

ORDER Per Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member: The instant appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order dated 06.01.2025 passed by NFAC u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the “Act”]. 2. The revenue in this appeal is aggrieved by the action ... appeal before us by taking the following grounds of appeal: “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT (Appeal), NFAC has erred in restricting the addition to Rs.16,21,630 as against the addition made of Rs. 20270371 despite the fact that he has agreed