← 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

Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Exemption Ward-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 240/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 240/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Global University Foundation Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (Exemption) Ward-1 Pan:Aaicg0020F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Suvibha Nolka राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Sankar Pandi, P, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14/07/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y.2021-22. 2. There Is A Delay Of 506 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Supported By An Affidavit Of The Director Of The Assessee Foundation. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Was Not Served With The Impugned Order Dated 14/07/2023 Passed By The Learned Cit (A) & Therefore, Due To The Non-Communication Of The Impugned Order, The Assessee

For Appellant: CA Suvibha NolkaFor Respondent: : Shri Sankar Pandi, P, Sr.AR
Section 11Section 143(1)

/ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14/07/2023 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2021-22. 2. There is a delay of 506 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation

Kapil Foods and Structures Private Limited, Warangal vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 206/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.205 & 206/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17 & 2017-18) M/S. Kapil Foods & Structures Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Pvt. Ltd., Warangal. Pan: Aacck2614F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 26/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Kapil Foods & Structures Pvt. Ltd. (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Both Dated 09.12.2024 For The A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Issues Involved In Both These Appeals Are Identical & Belong To The Same Assessee, One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(iii)

Structures Pvt. Ltd. (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), both dated 09.12.2024 for the A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are identical

Kapil Foods and Structures Private Limited, Warangal vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 205/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.205 & 206/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17 & 2017-18) M/S. Kapil Foods & Structures Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle-3(1), Hyderabad. Pvt. Ltd., Warangal. Pan: Aacck2614F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 26/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Kapil Foods & Structures Pvt. Ltd. (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Both Dated 09.12.2024 For The A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Issues Involved In Both These Appeals Are Identical & Belong To The Same Assessee, One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(iii)

Structures Pvt. Ltd. (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the separate orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), both dated 09.12.2024 for the A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are identical

Vishanthi Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

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

ITA 1956/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1956/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vishanthi Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, New No. 32, Old No. 8, Manna Reddy Exemption Ward 4, Street, T. Nagar 600 017. Chennai. [Pan:Aaatv3798A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Raised 9 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Without Condoning

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 11(2)Section 143(3)

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.06.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The assessee raised 9 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration

Kotagiri Cooperative Store, Nilgiris vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ooty

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

ITA 1951/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1951/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kotagiri Cooperative Store, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 1, Kotagiri Post , Kotagiri, Ward 1, The Nilgiris 643 217. Ooty. [Pan:Aaaak3367P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. On Perusal Of The Assessment Order, We Note That The Assessing Officer Disallowed The Claim Of Deduction Under Section 80P(2)(A)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Not Allowable As Per The 2

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(a)

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.06.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of deduction

T.C. 30 Thothukudi Port Aluvalar Co-Op Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., Thoothukudi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tutucorin

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

ITA 1945/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1945/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 T.C. 30, Thoothukudi Port Aluvalar Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Co-Op. Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward 1, Thoothukudi 628 004. Tuticorin. [Pan:Aagat3402L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. In The Grounds Of Appeal, Besides Challenging Assumption Of Jurisdiction Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In 2

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80P

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.06.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. In the grounds of appeal, besides challenging assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income ... dated 24.06.2025 placed at page 50 of the paper book and prayed to quash the assessment order passed by the NFAC without issuing notice under section 148A(d) of the Act. 5. The ld. DR Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT supported the order passed the Assessing Officer. 6. We have

Couppammal, Pondicherry vs. ITO, Ward-3, Puducherry

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

ITA 1939/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1939/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Couppammal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 50, Nainiappa Pillai Street, Ward 3, Chinnakadai, Pondicherry 605 001. Puducherry. [Pan:Adapc8638D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Abhishek Murali, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 69 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Murali, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 69A

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.02.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 69 days. The assessee filed

Natarajan Murugan, Tuticorin vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Tuticorin

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

ITA 1935/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1935/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Natarajan Murugan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 14/14/4 K.T.C. Nagar, Melur, Ward 1(2), Tuticorin S.O. Ettayapuram Road, Tuticorin. Tuticorin 628 002. [Pan:Aogpm4428L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Thulasiram, Avocate & Shri S. Kumarasubramanian, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.04.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 7 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons.

For Appellant: Shri R. Thulasiram, Avocate &For Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 147

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 7 days. The assessee filed