Sukesini Kumili Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Reassessment & Penalty Quashed: Notices Issued by Jurisdictional AO After Faceless Scheme Held Void
The Hyderabad Bench (SMC) of the ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings as well as consequential penalty orders for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17, holding that notices issued under Section 148 and orders passed under Section 148A(d) by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after 29.03.2022 were without jurisdiction and void ab initio.
The Tribunal noted that, pursuant to CBDT Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A, all reassessment proceedings and notices under Section 148 issued on or after that date must mandatorily be carried out through the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). In the present cases, both the orders under Section 148A(d) and notices under Section 148 (dated 06.04.2022, 20.03.2023 and 25.03.2023) were issued by the JAO, in clear violation of the faceless reassessment scheme.
Relying on the Telangana High Court judgment in Kotha Kanthaiah and a consistent line of High Court decisions including Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Kankanala Ravindra Reddy and others, the Tribunal held that the JAO had ceased to have authority to issue reassessment notices after 29.03.2022. A notice issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction is void, and all consequential proceedings including assessment orders stand vitiated.
Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and quashed the reassessment orders in the quantum appeals. Since the very foundation of the assessments was held invalid, the connected penalty orders were also quashed as unsustainable. Liberty was granted to revive the matters depending on the final outcome of the pending SLP before the Supreme Court in the Hexaware case.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD
