Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The High Court held that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) is not permitted to issue a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, as it would amount to a breach of the provisions of Section 151A, which has brought a regime of faceless assessment. As per the decision in Hexaware Technology Ltd., the provisions of Section 151A clearly mandate faceless assessment. There is no concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) for issuance of notice u/s 148 or passing assessment/reassessment orders. When specific jurisdiction has been assigned to either the JAO or the FAO under the Scheme dated 29th March 2022, it is to the exclusion of the other. Accepting the Revenue's argument would lead to chaos and render the faceless proceedings redundant. In the present case, the Revenue has not complied with the Scheme notified u/s 151A(2), which governs the conduct of proceedings u/ss 148A and 148. The explicit declaration of the law in Hexaware renders the grievance of the Assessee sustainable, and the manner of initiating proceedings vitiates the proceedings.
The High Court held that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) is not permitted to issue a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, as it would amount to a breach of the provisions of Section 151A, which has brought a regime of faceless assessment. As per the decision in Hexaware Technology Ltd., the provisions of Section 151A clearly mandate faceless assessment. There is no concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) for issuance of notice u/s 148 or passing assessment/reassessment orders. When specific jurisdiction has been assigned to either the JAO or the FAO under the Scheme dated 29th March 2022, it is to the exclusion of the other. Accepting the Revenue's argument would lead to chaos and render the faceless proceedings redundant. In the present case, the Revenue has not complied with the Scheme notified u/s 151A(2), which governs the conduct of proceedings u/ss 148A and 148. The explicit declaration of the law in Hexaware renders the grievance of the Assessee sustainable, and the manner of initiating proceedings vitiates the proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
