Geeta Ramakrishna Hegde Vs PCIT (Karnataka High Court)
AO, please don’t show your face – Faceless Assessment means FACEless— Karnataka High Court strikes down reassessment for violating Faceless Assessment procedure – AO had no jurisdiction to issue notice
In this writ petition, Assessee challenged a reassessment order passed under sections 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Income-tax Act for AY 2016-17. The core grievance was not about the merits of the addition, but about the procedure adopted by the department.
What went wrong procedurally?
As per section 144B & the Faceless Assessment Scheme (FAS), all reassessment proceedings are mandatorily required to be carried out through the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC).
However, in this case, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer (AO) issued the notice & passed the reassessment order, bypassing the faceless system completely.
This was treated as a jurisdictional violation, not a mere technical error.
Court’s Observation
- The High Court noted that the same issue is already pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 27736/2023 (Union of India v. Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills), where the validity of reassessment orders passed outside the faceless scheme is under scrutiny.
- Since the Apex Court is seized of the matter, the High Court chose to align with the legal position emerging from that case.
