Nazia Amreen Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Assessee challenged validity of notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2022 issued by JAO, contending that after CBDT notification dated 29.03.2022 framing the “e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022” u/s 151A, issuance of all notices u/s 148A(b), 148A(d) & 148 must be through automated faceless allocation via NFAC. Since JAO issued the notice manually, Assessee argued reopening is void ab initio. Reliance was placed on Madras HC Division Bench ruling in Mark Studio India (P.) Ltd (24.06.2025), which followed Hexaware Technologies (Bom HC), holding that jurisdictional AO cannot issue 148A/148 notices after 29.03.2022.
Revenue relied on contrary Delhi HC, Calcutta HC & Single Bench Madras HC and argued concurrent jurisdiction. Tribunal noted from para 2–3 of assessment order that the 148 notice was indeed issued by JAO on 31.03.2022. Once jurisdictional High Court Division Bench has held that such notices must be issued only by Faceless Assessment Unit, Tribunal is bound to follow it. Reopening by JAO is contrary to law & violative of Rule of Law.
Accordingly, notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2022 was held invalid & bad in law, and reassessment order dated 20.03.2023 was declared null in eyes of law. Appeal allowed on legal issue without examining merits of the additions.
