9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice dated 06 April, 2023 ("impugned notice") issued to the Petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), and also the underlying prior notice and order under Section 148A (b) and Section 148A (d) of the Act, respectively. The reassessment under Section 148 of the Act has been initiated in respect of returns filed by the Petitioner-Assessee for the Assessment Year 2019-20. 3. On perusal of the record, it is apparent that the notice dated 06 April, 2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act and indeed the underlying order of the same date under Section 148A (d) of the Act are issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer ("JAO") and not by a Faceless Assessing Officer ("FAO"), as is required by the provisions of Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... datory and is required to be followed by the Department and does not give any discretion to the Department to choose whether to follow it or not. That automated allocation is defined in paragraph 2(b) of the Scheme to mean an algorithm for randomised allocation of cases by using suitable technological tools including artificial intelligence and machine learning with a view to optimise the use of resources. Therefore, it means that the case can be allocated randomly to any officer who would then have jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act. It is not the case of respondent no.1 that respondent no.1 was the random officer who had been allocated jurisdiction. 36. With respect to the arguments of the Revenue, i.e., the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tuation, not only clause 3(b) but also the first two lines below clause 3(b) would be otiose, as it deals with the aspect of issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. Respondents, being an authority subordinate to the CBDT, cannot argue that the Scheme framed by the CBDT, and which has been laid before both House of Parliament is partly otiose and inapplicable. ........" 37 When an authority acts contrary to law, the said act of the Authority is required to be quashed and set aside as invalid and bad in law and the person seeking to quash such an action is not required to establish prejudice from the said Act. An act which is done by an authority contrary to the provisions of the statue, itself causes prejudice to assessee. All as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24 dt. 2-07-2024, whereby in similar circumstances, this Court has allowed the petition considering the provisions of Section 151A of the Act. 7. In the light of the above discussion, and as there is no dispute that the JAO had no jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice, the Writ Petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned notice as well as order are hereby quashed and set aside. So also consequential demand notices or penalty notices will also stand quashed and set aside. 8. We make it clear that having disposed of this petition on the ground of non-compliance with Section 151A of the Act, we have not expressed any opinion on the other issues raised in the Writ Petition. The other questions raised in this petition are not being an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
