Neena Wadhwa Vs PCIT (Delhi High Court)
Neena Wadhwa filed a writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2017-18 through notice u/s 148A(b) dt 20.03.2024, followed by order u/s 148A(d) & consequential notice u/s 148, all issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO).
Petitioner contended that initiation of reassessment by the JAO violated the Faceless Assessment Scheme & Section 151A, as such actions can be undertaken only by the Faceless AO.
The Division Bench noted that the issue stands squarely covered by its earlier judgment in T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO Ward 25(3), New Delhi (2024:DHC:8330-DB), wherein it was categorically held that both JAO & FAO have concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s 148. It was further noted that though the issue is pending before the Supreme Court, no stay has been granted against T.K.S. Builders.
The Court therefore held that since the law declared in T.K.S. Builders is binding within Delhi & remains operative, the challenge to jurisdiction cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed, and the connected applications were also disposed of as infructuous.
Delhi HC reaffirms that both JAO & FAO have concurrent jurisdiction to issue reassessment notices u/s 148; follows T.K.S. Builders & PC Jeweller rulings.
