Niranjan Devikumari Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Faceless Scheme Mandatory — Divergent HC Views? Tribunal Bound by Jurisdictional DB — Reopening Annulled Tribunal
Tribunal first condoned a 152-day delay after accepting Assessee’s affidavit. Assessee challenged the reopening on the sole legal ground that the 148 notice dated 25.04.2022 was issued by the Jurisdictional AO, even though CBDT, invoking Sec.151A, had notified the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 on 29.03.2022, mandating that all notices u/s 148/148A must thereafter be issued only through faceless automated allocation. Referring to the notice placed on record & the extensive list of High Court rulings reproduced—especially the Madras High Court Division Bench judgment in Mark Studio India Pvt Ltd (24.06.2025) concurring with Bombay HC in Hexaware (464 ITR 430)—Tribunal held that a 148 notice issued by JAO after 29.03.2022 is invalid & contrary to law. Contrary Delhi/Calcutta HC rulings & the earlier Single Bench of Madras HC were rejected because the binding jurisdictional Division Bench had reversed them. Hence, the notice u/s 148 dated 25.04.2022 was held illegal & bad in law, vitiating the reassessment order dated 19.12.2023. Tribunal therefore annulled the reopening & declined to go into merits of additions.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
