2023 (9) TMI 1465 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening assessment - notice u/s 148 has been issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer and not by National Faceless Assessment Center as required u/s 151A - distinguish between JAO or NFAC with respect to jurisdiction over a case - respondents submits that first of all the ground taken by the petitioner is hypertechnical since mode of service does not affect the contents and merit of the notice and secondly that the issuance of the aforesaid impugned notice u/s 148 is justifiable and sustainable in law in view of the office memorandum dated 20th February 2023 being F No. 370153/7/2023-TPL issued by the CBDT HELD THAT - As per paragraph 4 of the said office memorandum as stated above by DR that under the provisions of the Act both the JAO as well as units under NFAC have concurrent jurisdiction. The Act does not distinguish between JAO or NFAC with respect to jurisdiction over a case. This is further corroborated by the fact that under section 144B of the Act the records in a case are transferred back to the JAO as soon as the assessment proceedings are completed. So section 144B of the Act lays down the role of NFAC and the units under it for the specific purpose of conduct of assessment proceedings in a specific case in a particular Assessment Year. This cannot be construed to be meaning that the JAO is bereft of the jurisdiction over a particular assessee or with respect to procedures not falling under the ambit of section 144B of the Act. Since section 144B of the Act does not provide for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act there can be no ambiguity in the fact that the JAO still has the jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 of the Act. Thus no merit in the writ petition being WPO and accordingly the same is dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on jurisdictional grounds.

Jurisdictional Challenge:
The petitioner challenged the notice dated 28th April, 2023, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2019-20, contending that it was issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer and not by the National Faceless Assessment Center as required under Section 151A of the Act.

Legal Arguments:
The respondent's advocate argued that the petitioner's challenge was hypertechnical, emphasizing that the mode of service does not impact the contents or merit of the notice. Additionally, it was asserted that the issuance of the impugned notice under Section 148 was lawful, citing an office memorandum dated 20th February, 2023, issued by the CBDT. The advocate highlighted paragraph 4 of the memorandum, which clarified the concurrent jurisdiction of the jurisdictional assessing officer and units under the NFAC, emphasizing that the Act does not differentiate between the two in terms of jurisdiction over a case.

Court's Decision:
After considering the submissions and the circular of the Board, the Court found no merit in the petitioner's challenge. The writ petition was dismissed based on the interpretation that the jurisdictional assessing officer retained the authority to issue notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the existence of the National Faceless Assessment Center.