“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

Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1252/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1252/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vadodara Urban The Dy.Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Development Authority Circle-2 V/S. Vuda Bhavan, L&T Circle, Ahmedabad – 380 015 Karelibaugh S.O., Vadodara – 390 015 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaabv 0141 M (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Revenue By : Shri B.P. Rastogi, Cir-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/082025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/08/2025 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 27/03/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Assessee Is A Government Organization. That There Was A Delay Of 109 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Ld.Cit(A). The Ld.Counsel Further Invited Our Vadodara Urban Development Authority Vs. The Dy.Cit (Exemption), Circle-2 Asstt.Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Rastogi, CIR-DR

Section 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 27/03/2025 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 4. आयकर आयु' अपील ( ) / 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 //True Ce Copy

Shramik Serva Seva Trust, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward-1, Nashik

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

ITA 1553/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhivare

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 198Section 250Section 250(6)

captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14 is directed against the order dated 16.04.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 21.12.2018 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s147

Vaithav Arun Harnaskar, Pune vs. PCIT, Cir-5, Pune

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

ITA 1542/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 29.07.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 17.12.2019 passed u/s.143

Shri Sainath Sevabhavi Sanstha, Latur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Nanded

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

ITA 1319/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1319/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Sainath Sevabhavi Vs. Ito, Exemption Ward, Sanstha, Nanded. Akharwai, Harangul Bk, Latur, Harangai Bk, B.O., Latur- 413531. Pan : Aakts9324H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sarang Gudhate Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-7, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “(Without Prejudice To Each Other) 1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing Of Appeal. 2. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred In Denying The Expenditure Incurred & Treating The Gross Receipts As Income In Intimation U/S 143(1).

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Shradha Saburi Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Ahilyanagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Ahilyanagar

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

ITA 1163/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1163/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Shradha Saburi Gramin Vs. Ito, Ward-2, Bigar Sheti Sahakari Ahilyanagar. Patsanstha Maryadit, At Post Nimgaon Korhale, Rahata, Dist. Ahilyanagar- 423109. Pan : Aaeas0327F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prasad Bhandari (Virtual) Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal

For Appellant: Shri Prasad Bhandari (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 144Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nanded vs. Rakesh Hukumchand Agarwal, Nanded

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1655/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Abhay A. AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

S.G.& Co., Solapur vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(2), Pune

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

ITA 1611/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 154Section 69A

under :- “13. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find in the instant ... declared during the course of survey u/s 69 / 69C r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act as against the normal business income, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC allowed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the Assessing Officer has wrongly assessed the additional income offered by the assessee

Satya Syamala Mangamamba, K.V.Ranga Reddy vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 973/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, K. KulasekharFor Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 44A

been filed by the assessee against the Order dated 07.03.2025 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC], Delhi, relating to assessment year 2022-2023. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee filed her return of income on 30.09.2022 declaring

Comfort Cool Systems, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 689/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.689/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Comfort Cool Systems Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aaffc0969D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Shashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Shashank Dundu, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 147Section 250

/ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20/03/2025 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Page 1 of 6 ITA No 689 of 2025 Comfort Cool

Shivanand Madas, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-10(1), Hyderabad

ITA 483/HYD/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, Aluru V Sai SudhaFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 50Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD

Vengala Rao Madala, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 193/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.193/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Vengala Rao Madala, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-11(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan:Aqnpm6758J (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/08/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Vengala Rao Madala (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 04.10.2023 For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That There Is A Delay Of 403 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik

Section 144Section 249(4)(b)

Shri Vengala Rao Madala (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 04.10.2023 for the A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay

Dinesh Daga, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 472/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC], Delhi, relating to assessment year 2012-2013. 2. At the very outset, there is a delay of 539 days in filing the appeal before

Durgapur Steel City Society for Education, Bardhaman vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Exemption, Durgapur

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 255/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 12ASection 250

been requested to be condoned as under: “1. That the impugned first appellate order was passed on dt. 30/10/2023 by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC and received on dt. 22/11/2023. The last due date of filing the impugned second appeal was dt. 21/01/2024 but it is being filed ... Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [hereinafter “the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order dated 30.10.2023. 3 Durgapur Steel City Society for Education 1.1 In this case, the Ld. AO made several additions on account

M/S. Abheek Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(3), Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 232/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 147Section 153(3)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “the Ld. CIT(A)], vide order dated 01.01.2025. 1.1 In this case, the Ld.AO passed an order u/s 144 read with section

Mohammad Ali, Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Durgapur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1075/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Cit(A) Through Online & The Appeal Hearing Notice Not Issued In Registered E-Mail. That In The Months Of March & April, 2025 I Have Received Many Message From Department To Avail Vsvs, Then I Personally Appeared Before The A.O. Immediately & The A.O. Intimated Me That The Cit(A) Has Been Passed The Appellate Order. I

Section 250

occupation business, residing at Kailaspur, Laudoha, Amdahi, Bardhaman- 713381 do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC has passed the appellate order for the A.Υ. 2016- 17 on 21.03.2024. 60 days thereafter elapsed on 20.05.2024, so the due date for presenting

The Musiri Taluk Agricultural Co-Op. Mktg. Society Ltd., Tiruchirappalli vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Trichy

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

ITA 785/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.785/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jt. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 25.01.2025 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Income

Hyundai Steel India Pvt. Ltd., Kanchipuram vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 63/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.63/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154

Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 19.11.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income

T1461 Koothanallur Pacb Ltd., Thiruvarur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Thiruvarur

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2195/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2195/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & S.A. No. 73/Chny/2025 [In Ita No. 2195/Chny/2025] T1461 Koothanallur Pacb Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Rep. By Its Secretary Mr. T. Ward 1, Singaravelu, No. 27, Big Nazaar Street, Thiruvarur. Koothanallur Post, Mannargudi Taluk, Thiruvarur 614 101. [Pan:Aacat6581C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Paarkavi, Advocate For Shri J. Ashok, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 19.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2

For Appellant: Ms. T.V. Paarkavi, Advocate for Shri J. Ashok, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT

Section 119(2)(b)Section 147

filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.10.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2 I.T.A. No.2195/Chny/25 & S.A. No. 73/Chny/25 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay

Panjavarnam Sivasubramanian, Tirupur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Faceless Assessment

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

ITA 184/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.M. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 44ASection 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Vijayalakshmi, Legal Heir of Late Shri K.S. Venugopal, Telangana vs. ITO, Ncw-3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1499/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V. Elangovan, C.A JKFor Respondent: Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)

Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 14.09.2023 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter