The petitioner has impugned first respondents assessment order and the questions raised by the petition are whether the Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre could have assumed jurisdiction in respect to issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act and if not then would the consequent proceedings arising out of the said order fail and whether the petitioner can invoke this court’s jurisdiction despite the fact that the petitioner has participated in the courts proceedings and has filed a statutory appeal against the order. The court discussed the amendments to the section 143 of the Act.   Substitution of Section 143(2) and insertion of section 143 (3A), (3B) and (3C) along with the notification of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 vide the notification dated September 1, 2019 which was initially called as E-Assessment Scheme. By the order dated August 13, 2020 [F No. 187/3/2020-ITA-1] it was stated that all assessment orders shall be passed by the National E-Assessment Centre except the orders related to Central Charge and International Charge. Vide an internal communication dated May 17, 2021 wherein the Directorate on Income Tax (Systems) stated that in cases pertaining to Central Charges and International Charges notices under section 143(2) have been issued by the prescribed income tax authority and displayed to the concerned jurisdictional Assessing Officer for carrying out further jurisdiction Assessing Officer. The Faceless Assessment Scheme was repealed and National Faceless Assessment Scheme was introduced with the insertion of Section 144B. The petitioner thus challenged the validity of the communication. The court after taking into consideration the Section 24-Continuation of orders, etc. issued under enactments repealed and re-enacted the court held that the order dated August 13, 2020 is saved. On the second question the assessee had participated in the proceedings and completed its payment of first instalment, and questioning the authority of the Assessing Officer under section 124(1) is not only limited to territorial jurisdiction but extends to all types of jurisdiction and has a limitation period of one month and therefore the petitioner fails on the second question as well.(AY. 2020-21)