Section 148 notice issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the NFAC is legally invalid.
Issue
-
Whether a notice issued under Section 148 by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO), instead of the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) as mandated by the CBDT Notification dated 29-3-2022, is valid and sustainable in law.
Facts
-
The Assessee challenged a reassessment notice dated June 28, 2025, which was issued under Section 148 for the Assessment Year 2021-22.
-
The impugned notice was issued by the Assessee’s Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO).
-
The Assessee contended that the notice was bad in law, asserting that according to the CBDT Notification dated March 29, 2022, the exclusive jurisdiction to issue such notices rested solely with the NFAC.
Decision
-
The court held that the notice issued under Section 148 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, and not by the NFAC, was completely without jurisdiction.
-
The court ruled that the statutory mandate required the process to be entirely faceless as per the prescribed scheme.
-
Consequently, the impugned notice and all subsequent proceedings initiated pursuant to it were quashed.
Key Takeaways
-
Strict Adherence to Faceless Regime: Post the implementation of the faceless assessment mechanism and the specific CBDT notifications, jurisdictional lines are absolute; a standard Jurisdictional Assessing Officer cannot bypass the NFAC to issue reassessment notices.
-
Jurisdictional Fatal Error: Any procedural deviation where a physical or local officer issues a notice that is legally earmarked for the faceless centre results in a fundamental lack of jurisdiction, rendering the entire reassessment exercise void from its inception.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
Rudra Alloys (P.) Ltd.
v.
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Mrs. Lisa Gill and Mrs. MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, JJ.
CWP No. 21009 of 2025
JULY 25, 2025
Sunil K. Mukhi and Iqbal Roshan, Advs. for the Petitioner. Saurabh Kapoor, Adv. for the Respondent.
ORDER
Mrs. Lisa Gill, J. – Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 28.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961″), and all consequential proceedings for the Assessment year 20212022, on the ground that Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, in view of circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive power to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India 466 ITR 474 (Punjab & Haryana)/CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh v. Union of India 467 ITR 52 (Punjab & Haryana)/(CWP No. 21509 of 2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondents has also not disputed the same.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the file with their able assistance.
5. Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Relevant portion of decision dated 19.07.2024 in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) reads as under:-
“15. From the perusal of Section 151A, it is quite evident that scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148 as well as 148A. Clause 3(b) of notification dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A clearly provides that scheme would be applicable to notice under Section 148. Even otherwise, it is a settled proposition of law that assessment proceedings commence from the stage of issuance of show cause notice. The object of introduction of faceless assessment would be defeated if show cause notice under Section 148 is issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The respondents are heavily placing reliance upon office memorandum and letter issued by departmental authorities. It is axiomatic in tax jurisprudence that circulars, instructions and letters issued by Board or any other authority cannot override statutory provisions. The circulars are binding upon authorities and Courts are not bound by circulars. The mandate of Section 144B, 151A read with notification dated 29.03.2022 issued thereunder is quite lucid. There is no ambiguity in the language of statutory provisions, thus, office memorandum or any other instruction issued by Board or any other authority cannot be relied upon.”
6. In view of the above, present writ petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024.
7. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
