Smt. Prameela Pasumarthi Vs DCIT (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
The Andhra Pradesh High Court, in the matter of Smt. Prameela Pasumarthi vs. DCIT, considered a batch of writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging notices and orders issued under Sections 148-A(b), 148-A(d), and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitions raised the issue of whether the notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) complied with the faceless assessment procedure prescribed under the Income Tax Act. The court disposed of all writ petitions by a common order, observing that the issue in all cases was identical.
The background involves the evolution of the faceless assessment mechanism in India. The Finance Act, 2018, provided for a scheme to improve efficiency, transparency, and accountability by reducing the interface between the assessing officer and the assessee, utilizing team-based assessments and dynamic jurisdiction. This led to the “E-Assessment Scheme, 2019,” initially applicable to assessments under Section 143(3), and later to proceedings under Section 144. In 2021, Section 144(B) was incorporated into the Income Tax Act to formalize the faceless assessment process, which was further expanded through the Finance Act, 2022, to include proceedings under Section 147. Additionally, Section 151(A), introduced effective 1 November 2020, provides for a faceless mechanism for issuance of notices under Section 148, assessment, reassessment, and recomputation under Section 147, and sanctioning of notices, aimed at eliminating physical interaction, optimizing resources, and facilitating team-based assessment.
