← 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

Rubinder Kaur Prop. M/S Shree Sai Entperprises Opp. Nand Lal Market, Motia Khan Mandi Gobindgarh, Mandi Gobindgarh vs. The Income Tax Officer-1(5), Ludhiana

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 93/CHANDI/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.93/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Smt. Rubinder Kaur Ito (Prop. M/S Shree Sai Enterprises) Ward- 1(5) बनाम/ Vs. Opp. Nand Lal Market, Ludhiana. Motia Khan . Mandi Gobindgarh-147301 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Dyopk-2234-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri Rohit Garg (Ca) (Virtual Mode) – Ld. Ar By ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 21-11-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 29-12- 2022. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee Is Confirmation Of Additions

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Garg (CA) (Virtual Mode) – Ld. AR by ""For Respondent: Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 21-11-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s.144B

Janta Land Promoters Private Limited, Mohali vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1) Chandigarh, Mohali

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 907/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 907/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम M/S Janta Land Promoters Pvt.Ltd. The Ito, Sco 39-42, Sector 82, Ward 6(1), Vs Mohali. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Aabcj3450D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253(5)Section 28Section 36(1)(va)

took us through the written submission filed by him whose relevant part read as under : “GROUND NO 1 & 2 That The Ld. C.I.T.(A), NFAC, Delhi has wrongly passed the order u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against law and facts of the case. That ... C.I.T.(A), NFAC, Delhi was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 13,81,464/ made by the Assessing Officer under the head "Income from Property" for the assessment year under appeal without appreciating nomenclature of business of assessee and without appreciating that any income from these flats