Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 148A(d) is Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 506), cited in 152 of the 590 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 148A(d)

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT
24 ITR 506 · 1953 · Supreme Court
152
citing judgments

One cannot make a taxable profit or loss from transactions with oneself, as profit only arises from dealings with external third parties, even when transferring assets between different accounts or divisions of the same entity.

Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT
93 Taxmann.com 296 · 2018 · High Court
98
citing judgments

Approval granted by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner under Section 151 for reassessment proceedings under Section 148 must reflect due application of mind. A mere endorsement of "approved" without reasons or reference to material is insufficient, as the approval serves as a safeguard and must be meaningful, not ritualistic or formal.

Vishakapatnam in Smt. Bommana Swarna Rekha v. A. CIT
147 Taxmann 59 · 2005 · Reported
70
citing judgments
Gurpal Singh v. ITO
159 ITD 797 · 2016 · ITAT
58
citing judgments

Mere cash deposits in a bank account, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind on reasons to believe, are not sufficient grounds to invoke jurisdiction under Section 147 for reassessment proceedings.

Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
466 ITR 474 · 2024 · High Court
53
citing judgments

Reassessment notices under Section 148A, issued in the context of faceless assessment proceedings, must be issued by the designated Faceless Assessing Officer and not by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

Samp Furniture (P) Ltd. v. ITO
165 Taxmann.com 581 · 2024 · High Court
50
citing judgments

A faceless assessment, particularly one framed under the income escaping assessment provisions or an order issued under Section 148A(d), can be quashed where found to be invalid, allowing the assessee's appeal.

Sri Venkataramana Reddy v. DCIT
468 ITR 181 · 2024 · High Court
49
citing judgments

Notices issued under Section 148 concerning international taxation charges must be processed in a faceless manner, in accordance with Sections 144B and 151A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the scheme notified by the Central Government via CBDT Notification dated March 29, 2022.

Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
174 Taxmann.com 1203 · 2025 · High Court
43
citing judgments
Kairos Properties Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
468 ITR 168 · 2024 · High Court
41
citing judgments
Gurdas Garg v. CIT
63 Taxmann.com 289 · 2015 · High Court
37
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 40A(3) can be dispensed with if the assessee proves business expediency for cash payment and verifies the genuineness of the transaction, even if it doesn't fall under Rule 6DD.

Judgments on Section 148A(d)

ESTATE OF BINOY KUMAR CHANDRA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 32(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2810/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Apr 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Estate Of Binoy Kumar Chandra Vs. Office Of The Income-Tax Officer P-24, C.I.T. Road Entally, Ward-32(2), Kolkata, 10B, Kolkata-700014, West Bengal Middleton Row, Kolkata-700 71 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabae6679B Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri Aditya Bikram, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan &For Respondent: Shri Aditya Bikram, DR
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148ASection 270ASection 270A(2)(b)Section 270A(6)

KAMLA YADAV,SHAKURPUR,DWELHI vs. ACIT-ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC

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

ITA 1554/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 69A

CHANDRABHAN SURYABHAN SHINE,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 1970/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mukul Kulkarni (virtually)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE,CHAMARAJANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJANAGAR

In the result Appeals of the Assessee are allowed and stay petitions are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2808/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sounadararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy. N – JCIT & Shri Raghu, ITO
Section 10Section 147Section 148

SUMAN VERMA,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-2(1),LUCKNOW-NEW , LUCKNOW

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

ITA 563/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2015-16 Suman Verma, Vs. Ito-2(1), 424, Samesi Anshik Mohanlalganj, Lucknow-New Lucknow, U.P. Pan: Anfpv3733M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 6.04.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee That She Had Filed Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144(4) For The Assessment Year 2015-16. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. Because On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case, The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In The Fact & Law That The Entries Mentioned In The Order Under Section 148A(D) Of The Act, Of Rs. 95,41,537/- Two Times Are The Repeat Entries As The Bank Statement Was Available With A.O. During The Assessment Proceedings. 2. Because On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Ignored The Fact That From The Proceedings Initiated Under Section 148A(D) Of The Income Tax Act, Till The Disposal Of The First Appeal, The Appellant Due To Unawareness Of Her Legal Obligations Could File Any Of Her Explanations/ Submissions At Any Stage Of The Scrutiny Or Appellate Proceedings & Did Not Get Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard. 3. Because On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Also Totally Ignored The Fact That There Was No Cash Deposit During The Year In Question & Only Interest On Term Deposits Was Earned During The Year In Question, Which Is Also Reflecting In Form 26As.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

SACHIN MOHANLAL CHORDIA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3279/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3279/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sachin Mohanlal Chordia, V The Income Tax Officer, B-101, Isha Emerald, S. Ward-5(1), Pune. Bibwewdi, Kondhwa Road, Marketyard, Pune- 411037. Pan: Aanpc8554C Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Abhilash Hiran Revenue By Shri Amit Bobade & Shri Sanjay Dhivare (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 05/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)(Nfac) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 For Ay 2015-16 Dated 22/10/2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S 147 Rws 144 Rws 144B Of The Income Tax Act Dated 22/05/2023. Findings & Analysis :

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 3

SATYANARAYANA MURTHY KANCHARLA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-12(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 2122/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad30 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.2122/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Shri Satyanarayana Vs. Income Tax Officer Murthy Kancharla Ward 12 (1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Alypk6305P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Hemalatha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri D Praveen, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/03/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: CA HemalathaFor Respondent: : Shri D Praveen, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

JAYESHKUMAR KAILASHCHANDRA BHADADA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2318/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years: 2018-19

Section 147Section 148Section 148A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, DELHI , JHANDEWALAN vs. KRSKA CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED , DELHI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4666/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

SHAILESH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3641/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Amitabh Shuklashailesh Kumar Vs Acit W-82/1, Eastern Avenue, Sainik Central Circle-27 Farms, New Delhi Jhandewalan, New Delhi Pan: Afppk1645B (Applicant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. P. Mall, Adv Respondent By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.03.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, (‘Ld. Cit (A)’ For Short), New Delhi Dated 28/03/2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Declaring Income Of Rs. 18,18,380/-. An Assessment Order Came To Be Passed U/S 147 Of The Act On 30/05/2023 By Computing The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 72,84,905/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 18,18,380/-. Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Dated 30/05/2023, Assessee Preferred Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Order Dated 28/03/2025, Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 3(1)

PRAVEEN SANJIV,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-7(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3834/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3834/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Praveen Sanjiv, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 45, W Block, 7Th Street, Anna Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Nagar, Chennai 600 040. Chennai. [Pan: Fzzps0216R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.12.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Ground No. 1 Raised By The Assessee Is General In Nature & Requires No Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

C 2062 KAVERIPAKKAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOP CRDEIT SOCIETY,VELLORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, VELLORE, VELLORE

ITA 3998/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3998/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 C 2062 Kaveripakkam Primary Vs Income-Tax Officer, Agricultural Coop Credit Society, Ward-1, No.2, Barracks 320, Theradi Street, Cross Street, Officers Kaveripakkam, Arakkonam, Lane, Vellore-632001. Vellore – 632505. Pan: Aahfc5813C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri J. Saravanan – Advocate Revenue By Ms. R Anitha, Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13/03/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2019-20 Dated 08.08.2025. The Assesseeraised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 69A

BISHNUPRIYA BIJAYCHANDRA MAHANTY,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

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

ITA 4477/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bishnupriya Bijaychandra Mahanty Ito, Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai 204 Plot 13/A Wing Siddhivinayak It-Office, Vashi Railway Vs. Chs, Sector 6, Ghansoli, Navi Station Building, Mumbai 400701, Navi Mumbai- 400703 Authroised Person Add: 218, Ratna High Street, Naranpura, Ahmedabad- 380013 Pan No. Btdpm 7308 A Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Pritesh L. Shah (Virtually
Section 1Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69

SHIV EXTRUSION,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 646/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Extrusion Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot No.3978 Phase Iiiroad Income Tax Office, Ito Ward No.-R Dared, Jamnagar 2(10), Jamnagar, Income 361004, Gujarat, India, Jamnagar Tax Office, Shiv Smruti, Jamnagar, Jamnagar, Gujarat, 361008, Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkfs7199F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 250

INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 22(1), CHENNAI vs. EZHUMALAI, THIRUKAZHUKUNDRAM

ITA 4108/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4108/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Income Tax Officer, V Ezhumalai, Non Corporate Ward- S 1123, Ponpatharkoodam, 22(1), Tambaram Gangai Amman Koil Street, Thirukazhukundram, Chengalpattu – 603405 Pan: Acipe8113C Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. V Aswathy – Jcit Date Of Hearing 18/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12/03/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi

Section 120Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATION TAXATION) VADODARA, VADODARA vs. AHMED MAHOMED PANDOR, BHARUCH

ITA 1667/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha1.आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1667/Ahd/2025 – By Revenue 2.आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1602/Ahd/2025 – By Assessee (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17) 1. The Acit 1. Ahmed Mahomed बनाम (Internation Taxation) Pandor / Vadodara – 390 007 Moti Masjid Falia V/S. Jitali Ankleshwar Bharuch – 393 001 2. Ahmed Mahomed 2. The Acit Circle Pandor Int. Txn, Ankleshwar Vadodara – 390 007 Bharuch – 393 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Cwupp 2469 N (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) (") यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rasesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/03/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Are Cross-Appeals One By The Revenue & The Other 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 06/06/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250

KALPANA SANJAY PAWAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD-41(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 9047/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: the Tribunal challenging the validity of the re-assessment proceedings raising, inter alia, the following grounds: "2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in issuing the order under Section 148A(d) and the notice under Section 148 after obtaining the approval of the approval of PCIT-1, Mumbai which was not the correct 'specified authority' as per Section 151 who should have approved it when three years have already elapsed from the

For Appellant: Shri Aditya RamachandranFor Respondent: Ms. Deepika Arora
Section 1Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

BASTI SAHKARI KRAYA CENTER VIKRAY SAMITI LIMITED,BASTI vs. ITO, BASTI

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

ITA 539/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2015-16 Basti Sahkari Kraya Center V. Income Tax Officer Vikray Samiti Limited National Faceless Raja Bazar, Purani Basti, Basti- Assessment, New Delhi- 272002, Uttar Pradesh, India. 110001. Tan/Pan: Aacab0882G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit-Dr O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shailendra Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 253(3)Section 69A

DEEPAK MAHADEO BHOIR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, 42(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 3597/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokardeepak Mahadeo Bhoir, Income Tax Officer, C/O Bharat Kumar, 317, Ward 42(1)(2), Prasad Chamber, Opera House, Vs. Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai – 400 004 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Ajupb 7841H Appellant By : Shri Bharat Kumar, Ca Respondent By : Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.- Dr (Appellant) (Respondent) Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.03.2026 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Order Dated 26.06.2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. 2. Before We Proceed To Decide The Substantive Issue Arising For Consideration, It Is Necessary To Provide A Brief Factual Background. This Appeal Was Earlier Disposed Of By The Coordinate Bench Vide Order Dated 12.12.2024. Subsequently, Assessee Filed A Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification/Recall Of The Appellate Order On The Ground That While Deciding The Appeal, The Bench Had Failed To Decide Ground No. 2.A & 2.B. While Deciding The Miscellaneous Application, The Bench Having Found Merit In The Submissions Of Assessee, Recalled The Order For The Limited Purpose Of Deciding Ground No. 2.A & 2.B Raised In The Memorandum Of Appeal. This Is How The Appeal Came Up For Hearing Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.- DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149

CHINNARAJU RAMESH,CHENNAI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NON-CORP WARD 15(1), CHENNAI

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3272/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3272/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Janarthanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Aswathy, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Showing 1–20 of 590 · Page 1 of 30

...