Gaze Fashion Trade Limited Vs ACIT (Rajasthan High Court)
Wrong Officer, Wrong Notice – Rajasthan HC Quashes Sec.148 Reassessment by JAO Instead of FAO
In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur struck down a reassessment notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). The Division Bench held that once the faceless assessment regime has been brought into force, any notice u/s 148 must emanate from the FAO & not from the traditional JAO.
Petitioner challenged the notice dated 15.03.2024 on the ground that it was issued by JAO, thereby vitiating the very foundation of reassessment proceedings. Counsel for petitioner relied heavily on judicial precedents including Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs. ACIT (Bombay HC) [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225, Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. ITO (Rajasthan HC, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 3386) & Shree Cement Ltd. Vs. ACIT (Rajasthan HC, Jaipur Bench, 05.08.2025). All these rulings consistently recognized that reassessment notices must come from FAO post implementation of the faceless scheme.
On behalf of the Revenue, it was argued that an SLP has already been filed in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. before the Hon’ble Supreme Court & notice has been issued therein. The department therefore sought liberty to revive the notice if the Apex Court were to upset the settled legal position. The Court accepted this submission & while quashing the notice dated 15.03.2024 issued u/s 148 by JAO, it specifically reserved liberty for the department to revive such notice depending on the outcome of the pending appeal before the Supreme Court.
