For AY 2018-19, the Petitioner (based in Delhi) filed a writ petition challenging the order u/s 148A(d) along with the notice issued u/s. 148 issued by the AO (based in Jaipur), primarily on the ground that (i) notice for proposed initiation of re-assessment was issued by a non-jurisdictional assessing officer, (ii) the notice u/s 148 was issued to a non-existing entity without proper sanction and (iii) the notice was issued on factually incorrect grounds. The Delhi High Court held that the AO (based in Jaipur) did not have jurisdiction over the Petitioner to propose the initiation of reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the order passed u/s 148A(d) as well as notice was issued u/s. 148 were set aside and quashed.  (AY. 2018 -19)

For AY 2018-19, the Petitioner (based in Delhi) filed a writ petition challenging the order u/s 148A(d) along with the notice issued u/s. 148 issued by the AO (based in Jaipur), primarily on the ground that (i) notice for proposed initiation of re-assessment was issued by a non-jurisdictional assessing officer, (ii) the notice u/s 148 was issued to a non-existing entity without proper sanction and (iii) the notice was issued on factually incorrect grounds. The Delhi High Court held that the AO (based in Jaipur) did not have jurisdiction over the Petitioner to propose the initiation of reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the order passed u/s 148A(d) as well as notice was issued u/s. 148 were set aside and quashed.  (AY. 2018 -19)