Dharmavaram Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Reassessment Quashed: JAO Cannot Issue 148 Notices Post-Faceless Regime- Hyd ITAT
The ITAT Hyderabad quashed reassessment proceedings for AYs 2018-19 and 2019-20 on a fundamental jurisdictional defect, holding that notices issued under Sections 148 and orders passed under Section 148A(d) by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after 29.03.2022 are invalid in law. As per CBDT Notification No. 18/2022, all such proceedings must mandatorily be carried out through the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), and any deviation renders the entire exercise void ab initio.
The Tribunal placed strong reliance on the Telangana High Court ruling in Kotha Kanthaiah v. ITO (W.P. No. 344/2025, dated 24.04.2025), where it was categorically held that reassessment proceedings initiated outside the faceless framework post the notification are unsustainable and liable to be quashed. The High Court further emphasized that once the initiation itself is procedurally invalid, all consequential proceedings automatically fail.
Importantly, the ITAT also noted that this position is not isolated but forms part of a consistent judicial trend across multiple High Courts. Decisions of the Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Gauhati High Court in Ram Narayan Sah, Punjab & Haryana High Court in Jatinder Singh Bangu, Telangana High Court in Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola, Gujarat High Court in Mansukhbhai Dahyabhai Radadiya, Jharkhand High Court in Shyam Sundar Saw, Rajasthan High Court in Sharda Devi Chhajer, and the Calcutta High Court in Girdhar Gopal Dalmia have all taken a similar view that reassessment notices issued otherwise than in faceless mode after 29.03.2022 are legally untenable.
