https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465553 The dominant issue was whether the jurisdictional AO had authority to issue notices under s.148 after introduction of the faceless regime under s.151A. Relying on the reasoning adopted by another HC that, once the statutory faceless framework and notifications operate, the jurisdictional AO cannot act dehors that scheme, the Court held that notices issued outside the faceless regime are contrary to law and without jurisdiction; consequently, the impugned show-cause notices were treated as non est and all proceedings founded on them were quashed. Liberty was reserved to the revenue to seek revival if the SC later upholds the revenue's position in the pending matter. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Apr 2026 17:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465553 The dominant issue was whether the jurisdictional AO had authority to issue notices under s.148 after introduction of the faceless regime under s.151A. Relying on the reasoning adopted by another HC that, once the statutory faceless framework and notifications operate, the jurisdictional AO cannot act dehors that scheme, the Court held that notices issued outside the faceless regime are contrary to law and without jurisdiction; consequently, the impugned show-cause notices were treated as non est and all proceedings founded on them were quashed. Liberty was reserved to the revenue to seek revival if the SC later upholds the revenue's position in the pending matter. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465553