https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775242 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. en-us Mon, 07 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Apr 2026 17:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775242 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. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775242