2023 (9) TMI 1465 - HC - Income Tax

Challenge to s.148 reopening notice fails; s.144B doesn't remove JAO authority to issue notices on mode of issuance

HC dismissed the writ petition challenging reopening notice under s.148. The court held that the office memorandum does not oust the jurisdiction of the ... Notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 151A and issuance by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) - concurrent jurisdiction of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) - relevance of CBDT office memorandum F No. 370153/7/2023-TPL dated 20th February, 2023 - role of section 144B vis-a -vis jurisdiction for issuance of notices - mode of service does not affect the validity of a noticeNotice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 151A and issuance by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) - concurrent jurisdiction of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) - relevance of CBDT office memorandum F No. 370153/7/2023-TPL dated 20th February, 2023 - role of section 144B vis-a -vis jurisdiction for issuance of notices - mode of service does not affect the validity of a notice - Validity of the notice dated 28th April, 2023 issued under Section 148 for Assessment Year 2019-20 although issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by NFAC. - HELD THAT: - The petitioner's challenge that the notice should have been issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre under Section 151A was rejected. The Court accepted the respondents' reliance on the CBDT office memorandum dated 20th February, 2023 (F No. 370153/7/2023-TPL), particularly paragraph 4, which records that both the jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and units under NFAC have concurrent jurisdiction and that section 144B only prescribes the role of NFAC for conduct of assessment proceedings and the transfer of records back to the JAO on completion. Since section 144B does not provide that notices under Section 148 must be issued by NFAC, there is no bar on the JAO issuing a notice under Section 148. The Court also treated the objection based on mode of service as hypertechnical, noting that mode of service does not affect the contents or merit of the notice. On these grounds the challenge was found to be without merit.Writ petition WPO 1566 of 2023 dismissed; the notice dated 28th April, 2023 under Section 148 for AY 2019-20 is sustained as validly issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer.Final Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Section 148 notice (28th April, 2023) for Assessment Year 2019-20, holding that the jurisdictional Assessing Officer validly issued the notice in view of the CBDT office memorandum and concurrent jurisdiction with NFAC, and that the mode of service objection was hypertechnical. 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.