← 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

Damodharan Vinodh Kumar, Tiruvallur vs. ITO, Ncw-7(3), Chennai

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

ITA 3795/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3795/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Damodharan Vinodh Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 312, Bougainvillea Flora Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Apartments, Pattabi, Pattabiram, Chennai. Tiruvallur 600 072. [Pan:Ahcpv6672N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Hitesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.11.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Shri Hitesh, Advocate Submits That The Ld. Cit(A) Dismissed The Appeal Without Condoning The Delay In Filing The Appeal For Ay 2020-21. He Prayed To Remand The Matter To The File Of The 2

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. At the outset, the ld. AR Shri Hitesh, Advocate submits that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed

M/S. Ghani Rasheed & Co., Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-4(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3767/CHNY/2025[2013-14 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3766 & 3767/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4] M/S. Ghani Rasheed & Co., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1/2, Kattur Sadayappan Street, Income Tax, Periamet, Chennai 600 003. Non Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai. [Tan:Cheg12362A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Girish Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Both Dated 15.09.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4].

For Appellant: Shri S. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

assessee are directed against separate orders both dated 15.09.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4]. 2. Since issues raised in these the appeals of the assessee are similar based

M/S. Ghani Rasheed & Co., Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-4(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3766/CHNY/2025[2013-14 (26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3766 & 3767/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4] M/S. Ghani Rasheed & Co., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1/2, Kattur Sadayappan Street, Income Tax, Periamet, Chennai 600 003. Non Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai. [Tan:Cheg12362A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Girish Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Both Dated 15.09.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4].

For Appellant: Shri S. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

assessee are directed against separate orders both dated 15.09.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4]. 2. Since issues raised in these the appeals of the assessee are similar based

Sivakumar, Dindigul vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Dindigul

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

ITA 3580/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3580/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sivakumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 2-114-1, North Street, M. Kurumbapatti, Ward 1, Nilakkottai Tk, Dindigul 624 202. Dindigul. [Pan: Fkcps0842D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Venkataraman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sbr Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 25.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.09.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, We Find That Out Of Total Credits Reflected In Bank Accounts Of ₹.76,95,084/- & The Assessing Officer Accepted The Explanations Offered By The Assessee For The Sources For Credits To An Extent Of ₹.23,17,258/- Relates To Sale Made During The Year Under 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Shri SBR Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl. CIT

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.09.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. At the outset, we find that out of total credits reflected in bank accounts