“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

Satya Tulasi Donepalli, Korukonda vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 3, Aayakar Bhavan, Near Kambala Tank

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

ITA 13/VIZ/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Aug 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.13/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2011-12) Vs. Satya Tulasi Donepalli Income Tax Officer-Ward-3 Rajahmundry Sri Parvathi Parameswara Oil Agency Main Road, Korukonda East Godavari District – 533289 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Avtpd0908N] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate : Shri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2025

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 246ASection 264

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री रिीश सूद ,न्याधयक

G S Real Estate and Allied Limited, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer 1- Dewas, Dewas

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 222/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 253Section 69A

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sushila Devi Umra vs. Ingh Patel Seva Sansthan, Barwanivs.CIT Exemption, Bhopal

ITA 105/IND/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisushila Devi Umravsingh Cit- Exemption Patel Seva Sansthan, 13, Old Housing Board बनाम/ Colony, Barwani S.O. Vs. Barwani (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abuas7259P Assessee By Shri N.D. Patwa & Shri Ashish Goyal, Ars Revenue By Shri Raghunath, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 25.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025

Section 12ASection 253

Hardeep Oberoi, Indore vs. ITO-4(5), Indore

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 70/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 144Section 246ASection 250Section 253

Rng Construction Co., Indira Nagar vs. DCIT, DCIT-CPC

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 156/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshirng Construction Co. Dcit बनाम/ 14, Sector-A, Vs. Indira Nagar, Mandideep (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaqfr9084B Assessee By Shri Yashwant Sharma, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 145ASection 40Section 43B

through P&L A/c: (i) CIT, Agra Vs. Chhata Sugar Co. Ltd. (2019) 104 taxmann.com 206 (Allahabad) (ii) Smt. Husna Parveen Vs. CIT, NFAC, Delhi (2022) 142 taxmann.com 2 (Varanasi – Trib) (iii) Munaf Ibrahim Memon Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Dhule (2017) 85 taxmann.com 236 (Pune – Trib.) (iv) Hemkunt Infratech

Kobsai Hospitallities Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Lucknow

In the result, ITA No.290/LKW/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes while

ITA 291/LKW/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, CIT DR

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 275(1)(a)Section 69

NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC for the assessment year 2013-14 on 29.01.2025 and 22.03.2025, dismissing the appeals of the assessee against the orders of the ld. AO passed on 28.03.2022, under section ... taken up together for the sake of convenience. The grounds of appeal, in both the appeals are as under: - “01. Because the CIT(A), NFAC, has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal without considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the explanation furnished

Kobsai Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Lucknow

In the result, ITA No.290/LKW/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes while

ITA 290/LKW/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, CIT DR

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 275(1)(a)Section 69

Shobha Yadav, Chandpura Bachhana, Bilhaur vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Knp-W

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

ITA 278/LKW/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2019-20 Shobha Yadav, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Chandpura Bachhana, Bilhaur, (Appeals), Kanpur Kanpur Nagar, U.P.-209202 Pan:Auxpy6004H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Shivam Singh Yadav, Adv Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 28.02.2025, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee In Limine. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Cit(A)) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal On The Ground Of Delay In Filling Of The Appeal By 33 Days, Without Appreciating The Bona Fide Reasons & Genuine Hardship Faced By The Appellant. 2. That The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Appellant Is An Illiterate Village Woman With No Access Or Understanding Of Technology & That She Neither Received The Notice Nor The Assessment Order In Physical Form, Leading To Unintentional Delay In Filing The Appeal. 3. That The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Consider That The Appellant'S Cause For Delay Was Neither Deliberate Nor Due To Negligence, But Solely Due To Lack Of Awareness & Therefore Deserved Liberal Construction In The Interest Of Substantial Justice. 4. That The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Appellant Did Not Show "Sufficient Cause" For Condonation Of Delay, Despite Her Candid Declaration Of Illiteracy, Lack Of Access To Email & Absence Of Physical Service Of Notices Circumstances Beyond Her Control.

For Appellant: Sh. Shivam Singh Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.02.2025, dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. That ... were sent to her email address shobhayadav987654@gmail.com and govingyadav3481@gmail.com. When these too failed to receive any response, letters were issued from NFAC and a show cause notice under section 144 was also issued and served upon the assessee, vide the aforementioned email addresses. However, these were not responded

Seema, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-4(4), Lucknow

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

ITA 255/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2016-17 Seema, Vs. Income Tax Officer-4(4), 349/276, Suppa House, Bazar Lucknow New Khala, Lucknow-226004 Pan:Ftyps6815K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Saurabh Gupta, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 14.09.2023, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee, Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Ao Passed Under Section 143(3), On 11.12.2018. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order U/S 250 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Appeals) Nfac Was Passed Without Providing Proper Opportunity To The Appellant, Which Is Against The Principles Of Natural Justice & Therefore, The Same Is Void Ab- Initio & Bad In Law. 2. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Ld Assessing Officer U/S 40(A)(3) Of The Act Amounting To Rs 3,01,36,682/- Without Appreciating The Material On Record & The Facts Of The Case. 3. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In Confirming The Disallowance Under Section 40A(3) Without Giving Due Weightage To The Totality Of The Circumstances & Considerations Of Business Expediency Existing In The Present Case As Contemplated In Section 40A(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Saurabh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 40A(3)

NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 14.09.2023, dismissing the appeal of the assessee, filed against the orders of the ld. AO passed under section ... under:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Order u/s 250 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) NFAC was passed without providing proper opportunity to the appellant, which is against the principles of natural justice and therefore, the same is void ab- initio

Khandelwal Soya Industries Limited, Rampur vs. ACIT(Centeral), Bareilly

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

ITA 93/LKW/2022[F.Y.2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. H. Usmani, CIT(DR)

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 194H

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

Bharat Mohanlal Solanki, Pune vs. ITO Ward 5(2), Pune

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

ITA 907/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Section 144Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH "SMC", PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

Yunus Mahemud Patel, Latur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Latur

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 450/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 69A

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 dated 10.01.2025 for the A.Y.2012-13 emanating from the Assessment Order under section 144 r.w.s

Gulamahemad Hamidulla Khan, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(3), Pune

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

ITA 166/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 132Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153CSection 250Section 69A

DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an Appeal filed by the Assessee against the Order of the Commissioner of Income tax (appeal) (NFAC) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2014-15 dated 18/11/2024 emanating from Assessment Order u/s.147 r.w.s144 r.w.s144B dated 19/05/2023. 2. Assessee has raised following

Sadashiv Shejal Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Sangli vs. ITO Ward -2, Pune

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

ITA 1363/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1363/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Sadashiv Shejal Nagari Vs. Ito, Ward-2, Sangli. Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, 924B, Kokitkar Bhava, Upper Gadgil Fruit Shop, Kapad Peth, Sangli- 416416. Pan : Aabas9495F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Narendra Joshi (Virtual) : Revenue By : Shri Milind Debaje Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.03.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Primary Credit Cooperative Society Duly Registered Under Maharashtra State Cooperative Societies Act. The Assessee Has E-Filed Return Of Income On 06.12.2020 Declaring Total Income At Rs.Nil After

For Respondent: Shri Milind Debaje

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

Aruna Singh, Thane vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Kalyan

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

ITA 1007/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 270A

appeal :- “1. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (A) – NFAC Delhi, is 2 not justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay of 137 days in filing the appeal, for the reasons

Mr. Nilesh Vilas Gugale, Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Pune

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

ITA 2762/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 147Section 250Section 69A

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], Delhi passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 24.08.2024 for the A.Y.2018-19 emanating from the Assessment Order under section 147 r.w.s ... raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.2762/PUN/2024[A] “1) That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A)NFAC has erred in passing the ex parte order u/s 250 of the IT Act, 1961 and upholding the additions of Rs.2,19,74,510/- made

Nitin Rajaram Dhane, Satara vs. The DCIT Citrcle, Satara

In the result, for all the reasons discussed, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2748/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

paid in USA. Aggrieved by the Order u/s 143(1) of the Act, the Assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) (NFAC). The Addl.CIT(appeal) passed an order u/s 250 confirming the order u/s 143(1), on the basis that the Form number 67 was filed ... case of delay in filing Form No. 67. Same view is also taken by a coordinate division bench in Vinodkumar Lakshmipathi V CIT(A) NFAC ITA No.680/Bang/2022 06.09.2022. It is well settled that while laying down a particular procedure, if no negative or adverse consequences are contemplated for non- adherence

Karmayogi Sr Paricharak Multistate Coopertive Credit Society Limited, Pandharpur vs. ITO Ward 2, Pandharpur

In the result Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2476/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 10ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80P

Ashok Daulatrao Ithape, Pune vs. ITO Ward 11(1), Pune

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 2315/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 147Section 148Section 250

Mr Apresh Tukaram Khot, Raigad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panvel, Circle-Panvel

In the result appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 209/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 147oSection 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A