Jagtamba Timber Mart Vs DCIT (Rajasthan High Court)
The petitioner challenged a notice dated 24 March 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the assessment order dated 21 March 2025 passed under Section 147. One of the central grounds raised was that the notice had been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), which the petitioner argued made the notice invalid under the faceless reassessment scheme.
The petitioner relied on decisions of this Court in Shree Cement Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Others and Sharda Devi Chhajer v. The Income Tax Officer & Anr., both of which followed the Bombay High Court judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. These judgments held that a Section 148 notice issued by a JAO instead of an FAO is invalid, and any assessment order based on such a notice is also invalid.
In response, counsel for the Revenue referred to a Gujarat High Court decision in Talati and Talati LLP v. Office of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, where the Court did not interfere with a notice issued under Section 148 and directed the assessee to file a reply. The Rajasthan High Court examined this precedent and concluded that the facts in Talati and Talati LLP were materially different from those in the present case.
