“NFAC”

Rajendra Kumar Laxmi Devi, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(2)(3), Kanpur

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

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2017-18 Rajendra Kumar Laxmi Devi V. The Income Tax Officer 112/292, Swaroop Nagar, Ward-1(2)(3) Kanpur-208002. Aayakar Bhawan, 16/69, Civil Lines, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Aachr4041N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 29 07 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31 07 2025 O R D E R

VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi dated 19.11.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. Because ... NFAC, has erred on facts and in law in upholding the levy of penalty of Rs.3,55,472/- under section 271AAC(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which penalty is bad in law be deleted. 2. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing

Sri Thakur Ji Maharaj Mahavidyalaya Samiti, Hardoi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (Exemption), Bareilly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.258 & 259/LKW/2025 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/s Shri Thakur Ji Maharaj v. | The NFAC Mahavidyalaya Samiti Delhi Herval, Purvan Hardoi TAN/PAN:AAQTS1237B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR) ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA ... These appeals have been preferred by the assessee against separate orders, both dated 27.01.2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18. 2.0 Since the facts of the case and the issue involved in both the appeals are identical

Sri Thakur Ji Maharaj Mahavidyalaya Samiti, Hardoi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2 (Exemption), Bareilly

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.258 & 259/LKW/2025 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/s Shri Thakur Ji Maharaj v. The NFAC Mahavidyalaya Samiti Delhi Herval, Purvan Hardoi TAN/PAN:AAQTS1237B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal ... SRIVASTAVA, J.M.: These appeals have been preferred by the assessee against separate orders, both dated 27.01.2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18. 2.0 Since the facts of the case and the issue involved in both the appeals are identical

Skyhigh Infraprojects Private Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-6(1), Lucknow

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri, Nikhil Choudhary

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI, NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

Kalyan Kumar, Sant Kabeer Nagar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, Basti

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

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year:2017-18 Kalyan Kumar V. The Ito Ruihatta, Mehdawal Basti - New Sant Kabir Nagar (U.P) Tan/Pan:Bmmpk2586A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 21.03.2025, passed by the National Faceless appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income ... proceedings under sections 271AAC(1), 271F, 270A and 272A(1)(d) of the Act, separately. 3.0 Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC. However, the appeal before the NFAC came to be ITA No.239/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 6 dismissed ex-parte qua the assessee by the NFAC

Mohd. Azeem, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Kanpur

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

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2015-16 Mohd Azeem V. The Ito Ward 1(3)(1) 76/290, Cooli Bazar, Kanpur- Aaykar Bhawan, 16/69, 208001. Civil Lines, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Airpa8061C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.K. Agarwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 10 06 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31 07 2025 O R D E R

procedure, the Assessing Officer issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act. This notice remained un-complied with. Subsequently, this case was transferred to NFAC, but in the absence of digital footprints, it was transferred back to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for completion of assessment proceedings. Thereafter, notices were issued

Randheer Singh, Faizabad vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, NFAC, Centre, Delhi

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

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Randheer Singh V. The Assessment Unit Nara Pura Bazar Income Tax Department Faizabad Nfac, Delhi Tan/Pan:Gpfps1546D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

MEMBER AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Randheer Singh v. The Assessment Unit Nara Pura Bazar Income Tax Department faizabad NFAC, Delhi TAN/PAN:GPFPS1546D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal ... been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.05.2024, passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income

Devendra Pratap Singh, Kumarganj Faizabad vs. ITO-1, Faizabad-New, Faizabad

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

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

NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT, NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 3.01.2025 dismissing the appeals of the assessee against the order of the ld. AO passed under section 147 r.w.s ... No.1/LKW/2025 Devendra Pratap Singh A.Y. 2017-18 3. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), NFAC. The ld. CIT(A) duly noted from the assessment order that the assessee was an individual engaged in the business of selling petroleum products under

Super Packagers, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh vs. Income Tax Officer - 1(3)(4), Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh

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

Bench: Sh. Subhash Malguria & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Super Packagers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 80/72, Latouch Road, Ganga Oil Ward-1(3)(4), Kanpur 208001 Mill Compound, Kanpur-208001 Pan:Abtfs2620L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Puneet Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 10.12.2024, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 144 On 25.11.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts Of The Case In Passing The Impugned Order Dated 10/12/2024 Ex-Parte & Without Deciding The Appeal On Merits. 2. Learned Ao Has Erred In Law & On Facts Of The Case While Passing The Impugned Order Dated 25/11/2019 & Learned Cit(A) Has Upheld Because The Assessment In The Present Case Has Been Carried Out In Respect Of A Non-Existent Entity & Is Thus Void-Ab-Initio. 3. Because, The Present Case Being Of Dual Pan No. Abtfs2620L One Relating To Partnership Firm (Which Ceased To Exist From 01/04/2011) & The Other Relating To The Individual Person (Pan Aaqpj2279Q), Transaction Taken Place In The Bank With Respect To The Pan Of The Partnership Firm Having All Been Disclosed & Assessed In The Return Filed Under Pan Aaqpj2279Q. There Has Been No Escapement Of Income, The Addition Of Rs.93,90,793/- Made Be Deleted.

NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: [ This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 10.12.2024, dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the assessment order passed by the ld. AO under section ... brought the same to tax under section 115BBE. 3. Aggrieved with this assessment order, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), NFAC. Before the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, it was submitted that the assessee was a partnership firm bearing PAN No. ABTFS2620L which ceased its business