Faceless assessment jurisdiction under Section 148 notice set aside because the notice was issued by the wrong assessing officer.

A notice under Section 148 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer, was treated as contrary to the statutory requirement. The Bombay HC held the issue was already covered by a binding Division Bench precedent on the same point, and in the absence of any stay, followed that decision. The notice and all consequential proceedings and orders were set aside, with liberty to the Revenue to seek revival if the governing precedent is later reversed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was liable to be set aside on the ground that it had been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer.

Analysis: The notice was challenged as being contrary to the statutory requirement that such action be taken by the Faceless Assessing Officer. The matter was found to be fully covered by an earlier Division Bench on the same point, which was binding on the Court. In the absence of any stay of that precedent, the Court followed it and declined to keep the petition pending.

Conclusion: The notice under Section 148 and all consequential proceedings/orders were set aside, with liberty to the Revenue to seek revival if the governing precedent is later reversed.

---