2025 (10) TMI 361

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. Rule. Respondents waive service. With the consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally. 2. The above Writ Petition, interalia, challenges the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on various grounds. Alongwith the notice, the assessment order dated 4th March, 2025 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B is also impugned in the present Petition. One of the grounds to challenge the notice as well as the reassessment order is that the notice issued under Section 148 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, when the law mandates that it has to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer. This is a fatal defect, and therefore, the notice has to be quashed, is the arg....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. (supra), has taken a contrary view. Additionally, Mr. Sharma submitted that since the Assessing Officer is situated in Kolkata, the doctrine of Forum Conveniens would squarely apply, and on this ground also, the above Petition be dismissed and the Petitioner be given an opportunity to approach the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court with the grievances raised in the present Petition. 5. We have heard the learned advocates for the parties on the issue of the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner, originally, had its registered office in Kolkata. However, in 2017, the registered office of the Petitioner was shifted to Mumbai. A certificate to that effect has also been issued by the Registrar of Compani....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rom page 138 of the paper book. Further, the proceedings have been opened on the basis of the case related information details, which also reflects the address of the Petitioner as that of the Mumbai. This document is at page 120 of the paper book. 8. When one looks at all these factors, we find that atleast a substantial portion of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. If any cause of action has arisen outside its territorial jurisdiction, it would be only that the notice under Section 148 was issued by the Assessing Officer based in Kolkata and at the previous address of the Petitioner at Kolkata. Further, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, on instructions, has stated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in the notice issued under Section 148 has, in fact, taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. If at all, if we have to drive the Petitioner to go the Calcutta High Court it would be of a greater inconvenience to the Petitioner. Secondly, having held that the substantial cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, we certainly would have the jurisdiction to entertain the above Writ Petition. Hence, the preliminary objection raised by Mr. Sharma, is accordingly, rejected. 12. Mr. Sharma then submitted that though it is true that the issue raised in the present Petition, is concluded by the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra), the said decision has been challenged before ....