2025 (7) TMI 1310 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - notice to be issued by JOA or FAO - as argued Notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer when the law mandates that it has to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer. Revenue stated that though it is true that this issue is concluded by the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd 2024 (5) TMI 302 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT the said decision has been challenged before the Hon ble Supreme Court and the Hon ble Supreme Court is likely to take up the matter immediately on re-opening. She has fairly stated that there is no stay to the judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra). HELD THAT - Considering these facts we do not propose to keep the matter pending in this Court. Once it is fully covered by the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) we are bound to follow it. We accordingly set aside the impugned Notice issued under Section 148 and all other proceedings/orders emanating therefrom. We however grant liberty to the Revenue to revive the above Writ Petition in the event the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) is set aside by the Hon ble Supreme Court on this issue. It will not be necessary for the Revenue to file a separate Interim Application to seek a revival of this Petition and the same can be done simply by moving a Praecipe before this Court. We also make it clear that once the Petition is revived and restored the same would have to be decided on its own merits considering that several other issues are also raised challenging the Notice issued u/s 148.

Summary

The Bombay High Court, in a writ petition challenging a Section 148 Notice under the Income Tax Act, 1961, held that the Notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer is a "fatal defect" warranting quashing of the Notice. The Court relied on the Division Bench decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [(2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)], which squarely covers this issue. Although the Revenue informed that the Hexaware decision is under challenge before the Supreme Court, with no stay granted, the High Court declined to keep the matter pending and set aside the impugned Notice and all proceedings therefrom. The Court granted liberty to the Revenue to revive the petition if the Supreme Court sets aside the Hexaware decision, allowing revival by a simple Praecipe without a separate interim application. Upon revival, the petition would be decided on its own merits, including other challenges to the Section 148 Notice. The Rule was made absolute, the petition disposed of accordingly, and no costs were awarded.