Sprite Investment (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2024) 300 Taxman 526 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Jurisdiction-Notices issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO)-Re-assessment proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under section 144B-Contrary to provision of law-Notice and order is quashed.[S.119,120, 144B(7), 144B(8), 148, 1488A(b), 148A(d)),151A, Art.226]

The jurisdictional Assessing Officer issued on the assessee a notice under section 148A(b) in respect of the assessment year 2018-19 and passed the order under section 148A(d) dated 7-4-2022 and simultaneously issued a notice under section 148 dated 7-4-2022 and passed the reassessment order. On writ  the Court held that from a plain reading of the record, it is apparent that the notice under section 148 is issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by a Faceless Assessment Officer as is required by the provisions of section 151A. It is now well settled that for a notice to be validly issued for reassessment under section 148, the revenue would need to be compliant with section 151A. In the instant case, the revenue is not in compliance with the Scheme [Notification No. 18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL, dated 29-3-2022] notified by the Central Government pursuant to section 151A(2). The Scheme has also been tabled in Parliament and is in the character of subordinate legislation, which governs the conduct of proceedings under section 148A as well as section 148.  Since in view of provisions of section 151A jurisdictional Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148, impugned notice and all consequential proceedings deserve to be quashed and set aside.  (AY. 2018-19)