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 ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
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 jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO); NFAC units and JAOs have concurrent roles but s.144B merely governs assessment conduct and record transfer, not issuance of s.148 notices. Because s.144B does not cover issuance of notices under s.148, the JAO retains authority to issue such notices, and the challenge on the ground of mode of issuance was rejected as lacking merit.
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.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.