https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757850 The Bombay HC held that Jurisdictional Assessing Officers (JAO) cannot issue notices under Section 148 for income escaping assessment under the faceless assessment regime established by Section 151A of the IT Act. The Court ruled there is no concurrent jurisdiction between JAO and Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) - when specific jurisdiction is assigned to either authority under the March 29, 2022 scheme, it excludes the other. The Court emphasized that allowing concurrent jurisdiction would create chaos and render faceless proceedings redundant. Any action by authorities contrary to statutory provisions is invalid and causes prejudice to assessees, who are entitled to assessment following prescribed legal procedures. The case was decided in favor of the assessee. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Sep 2024 09:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757850 The Bombay HC held that Jurisdictional Assessing Officers (JAO) cannot issue notices under Section 148 for income escaping assessment under the faceless assessment regime established by Section 151A of the IT Act. The Court ruled there is no concurrent jurisdiction between JAO and Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) - when specific jurisdiction is assigned to either authority under the March 29, 2022 scheme, it excludes the other. The Court emphasized that allowing concurrent jurisdiction would create chaos and render faceless proceedings redundant. Any action by authorities contrary to statutory provisions is invalid and causes prejudice to assessees, who are entitled to assessment following prescribed legal procedures. The case was decided in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 27 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757850