← 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

Snehalkumar Bhogilal Trivedi, Gandhinagar vs. NFAC, Assessment Unit, Present Juris. the ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 740/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 740/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) बनाम/ Snehalkumar Bhogilal Nfac, Assessment Unit Trivedi – Present Jurisdiction - Vs. B-502, Radhe Helios, Income Tax Officer Reliance Chowkdi, Orbit Ward-3(3)(5), Mall, Kudasan, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Gujarat – 382421 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaxpt4034G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Pritesh Shah, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 274Section 54F

BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 740/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) बनाम/ Snehalkumar Bhogilal NFAC, Assessment Unit Trivedi – Present Jurisdiction - Vs. B-502, Radhe Helios, Income Tax Officer Reliance Chowkdi, Orbit Ward-3(3)(5), Mall, Kudasan, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Gujarat ... order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi dated 31.03.2022 confirming the levy of penalty under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates

Pushpakant Punjalal Chokshi, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Petlad

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

ITA 739/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 739/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ Pushpakant Punjalal The Income Tax Officer Chokshi Ward 1(3)(1), Petlad Vs. Prop: Chokshi Punjalal Somchand & Sons, Jawahar Road, Cambay, Anand – 388620, Gujarat "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agtps8836P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri M K Patel, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/08/2025 O R D E R The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As “Nfac”), Delhi Dated 21.02.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) & Relates To Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Raised In The Appeal By The Assessee Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 69A

order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi dated 21.02.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year

The Visnagar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle-Gandhinagar (Previously DCIT, Patan Circle, Patan), Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 738/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.738, 1414 & 1415/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) The Visnagar Nagarik Sahakari The Assistant Commissioner Bank Ltd.,(Under Liquidation) बनाम Of Income Tax, / Market Yard, Circle Gandhinagar. V/S. Visnagar, (Previously Dcit, Mehsana-384315, Patan Circle, Patan) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaft8764C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A P Nanavaty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], All Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Arising From The Assessments Framed By The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Patan [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Assessing Officer Or Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri A P Nanavaty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(4)

assessee is in appeals before us raising following revised grounds before us:  In Appeal No. ITA 738/Ahd/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 1. Ld. NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal on facts and in law on the ground of non-condonation of delay and on merits confirming addition ... pray to consider miscellaneous application for condonation of delay and after admitting such miscellaneous application for condonation of delay; delay in filing appeal before NFAC may be condoned. 4. Ld. NFAC has failed to appreciate that appellant has judgment in his own case being appeal no. ITA No.2251/Ahd/2015 DATED 30/09/2021

Jay Chemical Industries Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 543/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.543/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Jay Chemical Industries The Pr.Cit बनाम/ Private Limited Ahmedabad-1 V/S. Jay House, Ahmedabad – 380 015 Near Panchvati Circle Ambawadi Ahmedabad – 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacj 7628 J (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nimis Vayawala, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.P. Rastogi, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-1, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Pcit” For Short] Dated 07/03/2025 Passed In Exercise Of His Revision Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020- 2021. Jay Chemical Industries Pvt.Ltd.Vs. Pcit, Ahmedabad-1 Astt.Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Nimis Vayawala, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 135Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80G

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “बी“ ,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

The Visnagar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd (Under Liquidation), Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle-Gandhinagar (Previously DCIT, Patan Circle, Patan), Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.738, 1414 & 1415/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) The Visnagar Nagarik Sahakari The Assistant Commissioner Bank Ltd.,(Under Liquidation) बनाम Of Income Tax, / Market Yard, Circle Gandhinagar. V/S. Visnagar, (Previously Dcit, Mehsana-384315, Patan Circle, Patan) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaft8764C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A P Nanavaty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], All Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Arising From The Assessments Framed By The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Patan [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Assessing Officer Or Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri A P Nanavaty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(4)

assessee is in appeals before us raising following revised grounds before us:  In Appeal No. ITA 738/Ahd/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 1. Ld. NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal on facts and in law on the ground of non-condonation of delay and on merits confirming addition ... pray to consider miscellaneous application for condonation of delay and after admitting such miscellaneous application for condonation of delay; delay in filing appeal before NFAC may be condoned. 4. Ld. NFAC has failed to appreciate that appellant has judgment in his own case being appeal no. ITA No.2251/Ahd/2015 DATED 30/09/2021

Hansaben Girishbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed on this legal ground

ITA 1279/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1279/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Hansaben Girishbhai Shah The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 139, V.R. Shah Smruti Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Shikshan Mandir Ahmedabad – 380 015 Opp. Yogeshwar Nagar Society Nr. Dharnidhar Derasar Vasna Ahmedabad – 380 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aajpd 7188 H (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: 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 27/03/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. Hansaben Girishbhai Shah Vs. Dy.Cit, Cir-2(1)(1) Asst.Yeaar 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 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 27/03/2024 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment ... Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant 2. #&थ% / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु' / Concerned CIT आयकर आयु' अपील 4. ( ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi 5. िवभागीय #ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. , , 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स&ािपत #ित //// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt

Atul Bhanudas Shinde, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 14(5), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 970/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.970/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Atul Bhanudas Shinde, V The Income Tax Officer, Shetphal Haveli, Dhenu Nagar, S Ward-14(5), Pune. Bawada S.O, Shetphal Haveli, Pune – 413103. Maharashtra. Pan: Ectps5299N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sarang Gudhate –Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/08/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee In Form No.36 Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 14.02.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Act, For A.Y.2017-18 Dated 20.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 68

DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee in Form No.36 against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2017-18 dated 14.02.2025 emanating from Assessment Order under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s

Zuber Khan Iqbal Khal Pathan, Dhule vs. ITO Ward 1, Dhule

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 757/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.756 & 757/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2016-17 Zuber Khan Iqbalkhan Pathan, V The Income Tax Officer, Karim Bidi Compound, Wadjai S Ward-1, Dhule. Road, Dhule – 424001. Maharashtra. Pan: Abrpi3068E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishore Phadke –Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni –Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/08/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 & A.Y.2016-17 Both Dated 29.04.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Orders Under Section 147 Of The Act, For A.Y.2017-18 & A.Y.2016-17 Respectively; Both Dated 19.05.2023. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: These two appeals filed by the Assessee against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2017-18 and A.Y.2016-17 both dated 29.04.2024 emanating from separate Assessment Orders under section ... learned faceless AO, which is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151A of the ITA, 1961. 3. The learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 27,24,280/- u/s 69A of the ITA, 1961 made by the learned

Zuber Khan Iqbal Khan Pathan, Dhule vs. ITO, Ward 1, Dhule

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 756/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.756 & 757/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2016-17 Zuber Khan Iqbalkhan Pathan, V The Income Tax Officer, Karim Bidi Compound, Wadjai S Ward-1, Dhule. Road, Dhule – 424001. Maharashtra. Pan: Abrpi3068E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishore Phadke –Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni –Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/08/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 & A.Y.2016-17 Both Dated 29.04.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Orders Under Section 147 Of The Act, For A.Y.2017-18 & A.Y.2016-17 Respectively; Both Dated 19.05.2023. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: These two appeals filed by the Assessee against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2017-18 and A.Y.2016-17 both dated 29.04.2024 emanating from separate Assessment Orders under section ... learned faceless AO, which is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151A of the ITA, 1961. 3. The learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 27,24,280/- u/s 69A of the ITA, 1961 made by the learned