Swamedas Panithasan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Chennai ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings in Swamedas Panithasan vs ITO for AY 2015-16, holding that the notice u/s 148 dated 04-04-2022 issued by the Jurisdictional AO (JAO) was invalid in law, as it violated the CBDT Notification dated 29-03-2022 introducing the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022.
The Tribunal noted that post-notification, issuance of notice u/s 148 must be through faceless mode via NFAC/FAO, and not by the local JAO. Since the impugned notice was issued after 29-03-2022 and admittedly by the JAO (Non-Corporate Ward-17(2), Chennai), the very assumption of jurisdiction was illegal, vitiating all consequential proceedings.
ITAT relied extensively on binding High Court rulings including Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (Bom HC), Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (Telangana HC), Sri Venkatramana Reddy Patloola, Deepanjan Roy, and the Division Bench decision in TVS Credit Services Ltd. (Madras HC), which held that issuance of notice by JAO instead of FAO is a jurisdictional defect, not a curable irregularity. The Tribunal also noted that the SLP against Deepanjan Roy was dismissed by the Supreme Court, and there was no stay on Hexaware, making the law binding.
Accordingly, the 148 notice and all consequential reassessment orders were set aside, while keeping liberty open to Revenue to seek revival if the Supreme Court later reverses the position. The assessee’s appeal was allowed
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
