Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/section-148-reassessment-notices-follow-faceless-procedure-delhi-hc.html
Mehak Jagga Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Mehak Jagga challenging a reassessment notice issued by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner primarily sought to quash the order under Section 148A(3) and the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core of the challenge was based on two grounds: first, that the reassessment was initiated by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (AO) rather than a faceless AO who the petitioner claimed was the only competent authority; and second, on the merits of the case.
However, the petitioner’s counsel chose to press only the first argument, conceding that the second ground regarding the merits of the case would not be argued in the petition.
The court, in its ruling, relied on its own well-established judicial precedent. It referenced the case of TKS Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO Ward 25(3) New Delhi, where the court had already settled the very same issue. The court noted that the jurisdictional issue raised by the petitioner was covered and had been decided against similar challenges in the past. To reinforce its position, the court also cited its decision in PC Jeweller Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, which similarly dismissed a petition on the same grounds by relying on the TKS Builders judgment.
Based on this binding precedent, the Delhi High Court dismissed the petition, thereby affirming the authority of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings. The court also clarified that the petitioner’s rights to argue other issues before the relevant income tax authorities remain reserved. The connected application for a stay was also dismissed as it had become “infructuous” or no longer necessary.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 13149/2025 CM APPL. 53901/2025(Stay)
3. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
“a. Writ of Certiorari or Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India quashing Notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 25.06.2025 for AY 2019-20;
b. Writ of Certiorari or Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India quashing the order u/s 148A(3) of the Act dated 25.06.2025 for AY 2019-20;
c. A Writ of Prohibition as Writ, order or direction in the nature of Prohibition, or any other appropriate Writ, order of direction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India restraining the Respondent from continuing with the reassessment proceedings during the pendency of the present petition; and..”
4. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 25.06.2025 passed under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] and notice dated 25.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, relatable to the Assessment Year [‘AY’] 2019-20 primarily on two grounds:
i. that the proceeding for re-assessment has been initiated by jurisdictional Assessing Officer [‘AO’] and not by faceless AO who is competent.
ii. that even on merits, no case has been made out by the revenue for calling for re-assessment by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act.
5. At the outset, the learned counsel states that for the purpose of this petition he shall only press his first submission, that is, the jurisdictional AO had no power to initiate the process of re-assessment. He clarifies that the second submission is not being pressed.
6. The submission (i) being the only submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, suffice to state the issue has been settled by this Court in the case of TKS Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(3) New Delhi, NC- 2024:DHC:8330-DBand the same is binding on us.
7. In this regard, he has also fairly drawn our attention to order dated 23.01.2025 in WP(C) No. 13229/2024 PC Jeweller Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr wherein a coordinate bench of this Court by relying upon TKS Builders Pvt. Ltd (supra) has dismissed the petition in the following manner.
“1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: “Issue writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing of:
a. the notice dated 09.08.2024 issued by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(b) of the Act;
b. the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 148A(d) of the Act; and
c. the notice dated 29.08.2024 issued under section 148 of the Act, for assessment year 2018-19, and all proceedings/actions consequent thereto for assessment year 2018-19”
2.The petitioner has premised its challenge to the impugned notices issued under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) and Section 148 of the Act on the ground that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) did not have the jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under Section 148A and 148 of the Act after issuance of the Notification dated 29.03.2022 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) requiring reassessment proceedings to be conducted in a faceless manner.
3. The said issue is covered against the petitioner by the decision of this court in K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 25 (3) New Delhi, Neutral Citation:2024:DHC:8330-DB.
4. The petitioner seeks to reserve the rights and contentions to urge the same before the concerned authorities.
5. The present petition is accordingly dismissed.
6. It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties to agitate the other issues before the concerned Income Tax Authorities, are reserved.”
8. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. The application having become infructuous, is also dismissed.
aniltikotekar4sme.com 