TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 888
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Kumari Ramineni, Paras Collins Distilleries Private Limited, Alluri Dharani, Mr. Mohammad Sami Ullah, Mr. Mohammed Obedullah, Tharsingh Kethavath, Sri Kala Cherukuru, Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Mr. Zia Urrahman Khan, Bhanuchandar Siga, Raghu Kumar Manchukonda, Mohammed Abdul Rahman, Kavitha Reddy Neelapu, Raja Shekar Reddy Kallu, Chadalavada Vijayakumar, Kranti Kishore Degala, Srinidhi Enclaves, Mr. Shaik Khaliq Uddin Versus Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Kothagudem, The Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 61, Hyderabad, The Principal Chief Commissioner Income Tax AP and TS, AC Guards, Hyderabad and 2 others, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 31, Hyderabad, The DC/ACIT, Circle 51 Hyderabad and 2 others, The Government of India Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department New Delhi, Union of India Ministry of Finance, Rep by its Secretary New Delhi. For the Petitioners: Sri Thanneru Chaitanya Kumar, Sri P.Soma Shekar Reddy, Sri Mohd. Mukhairuddin representing learned counsel- Sri Md. Shabaz, Sri K. Govinda Rao, Sri S. Vijay Adith....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....indra Reddy vs. Income Tax Officer (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana). It is submitted that the present Writ Petitions may be disposed of on same lines after setting aside the impugned proceedings under Sections 148(A) and 148 of the Act and on similar terms as are set out in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra) and also in W.P.No.26304 of 2024, dated 28.04.2025. 4. In support of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, they relied on the judgments of the Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom), Abhin Anilkumar Sah vs. Income Tax Officer (International Taxation) and others (2024) 468 ITR 350 (Bom), Bank of India vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others (2024) 468 ITR 350 (Bom); judgment of Gauhati High Court in Ram Narayan Sah vs. Union of India and others (2024) 471 ITR 228 (Gauhati), judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (2024) 466 ITR 474 (P&H), judgments of Telangana High Court in Venkataramana Reddy Patloola vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others (2023) 468 ITR 181 (Telangana....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the Department, learned counsel for the respondents do not dispute that the initiation of impugned proceedings under Section 148(A) of the Act has been done by the JAO after coming into force of the Faceless Scheme with effect from 29.03.2022. 8. Learned Senior Standing Counsels for the respondents have also not been able to dispute that the legal issue as regards the jurisdiction of the JAO to initiate proceedings instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) have been well settled by the coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.26304 of 2024 and followed in several other judgments. 9. Learned Senior Standing Counsels for the respondents also do not dispute that a number of other jurisdictional High Courts have also taken the same view. However, they submit that a contrary view has been taken in the following decisions as well. In support of their submissions, they relied upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Caishen Enterprise LLP vs. Assistant Commissioner (2025) 176 taxmann.com 471 (Bombay), judgments of Madras High Court in Mark Studio India (P) Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer (2024) 169 taxmann.com 542 (Madras) and Perur Builders (P) Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... whole heartedly to ensure not to generate further litigation on issues which have been laid to rest by a large number of High Courts all of whom have taken a consistent stand that the action of the Income Tax Department being violative of the Finance Act, 2020 and Finance Act, 2021. Now, in order to protect the interest of the Revenue as also that of the assessee, it would be trite at this juncture, if we dispose of the writ petition with an observation/direction that the disposal of the instant writ petition in terms of the judgment rendered by this High Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy vs. Income Tax Officer [(2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana)] shall however be subject to the outcome of the SLPs which were filed by the Income Tax Department and which is pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 17. So far as the interest of the Revenue is concerned, we are of the considered opinion that the interest of the Revenue has already been considered and protected, as has been observed in paragraphs 36, 37 and 38 of the order which, for ready reference, is reproduced hereunder: 36. For all the aforesaid reasons, the impugned notices issued....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....preme Court in the pending SLP on the very same issue. 19. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands allowed in favour of the assessee so far as the issue of jurisdiction is concerned. As a consequence, the impugned notice under challenge under Sections 148-A and 148 stands set aside/quashed. The consequential orders, if any, also stand set aside/quashed in similar terms as have been passed by this High Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (1 supra). There shall be no order as to costs." 15. The impugned proceedings under Sections 148A and 148 of the Act assailed in these Writ Petitions are set aside. The consequential orders, if any, also stand set aside on similar terms as held in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra). The revenue is also granted liberty in the same terms as at para 18 of the above quoted orders. 16. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. 17. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ============= Document 1 SI. N WP No (2025) Assessee Name Filed or Counter Not Asst.Yr Receiv Info. ed Notice u/s 148 of the Ac Date of Notice u/s 14SA(b) of the IT Act Date of Order u'....