https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756863 The Bombay HC held that notices issued under Section 148 by Joint Assessment Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) were invalid due to lack of jurisdiction. The court found non-compliance with Section 151A and the Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022, which mandated faceless assessment procedures. Following the precedent in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., the court ruled that JAO lacked authority to issue such notices under the faceless assessment regime. The petition was allowed in favor of the assessee, declaring the impugned notices illegal and invalid. en-us Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jan 2025 17:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756863 The Bombay HC held that notices issued under Section 148 by Joint Assessment Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) were invalid due to lack of jurisdiction. The court found non-compliance with Section 151A and the Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022, which mandated faceless assessment procedures. Following the precedent in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., the court ruled that JAO lacked authority to issue such notices under the faceless assessment regime. The petition was allowed in favor of the assessee, declaring the impugned notices illegal and invalid. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756863