INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NAGERCOIL vs. THURAISWAMY THANGATHURAI, NAGERCOIL

आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These two appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objection appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the common order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC] dated 24.12.2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-20.

(2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing question of law of the assessee challenging the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, despite the provisions of Section 124(3)(a) of the Income Tax Act barred the assessee from questioning the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer after the expiry of one month from the date of service of the notice u/s.143(2) or completion of assessment, whichever is earlier.

(3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the notice u/s.148 issued on 04.04.2023 by the JAO is invalid notice without following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) Vs. Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology in SLP Appeal (C)

No(s).29304 of 2019 on May 1, 2023 [2023] 151 taxmann.com 434(SC) wherein held that Section 124(3)(a) precludes the assessee from questioning the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, if he does not do so within 30 days of receipt of notice under section 143(2).

(4) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of TVS Credit Services Ltd., and Mark Studio India Pvt. Ltd., in quashing / setting aside the notice u/s.148 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer as not valid, when the fact remains that the JAO, in compliance to the Finance Act, 2021, after following the due procedure u/s.148A, issued notice u/s.148 in the instant case.

(5) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in quashing the notice u/s.148, when the fact remains that as per Sec.144B(1) (i) of the Act, the National Faceless Assessment Centre shall assign the case selected for the purposes of faceless assessment under this section to a specific assessment unit through an automated allocation system indicating that the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) comes into play only when a case is "selected" and that the power of issue of notice u/s.148 is not within the ambit of the provisions and rests with the non-NFAC officer viz. the JAO.

(6) The Ld.CIT(A) is right when the new faceless assessment procedure introduced with effect from 01.04.2021 is applicable only for completion of assessment / reassessment and all other works including conduct of proceedings u/s. 148A & issuance of notice u/s.148 remains with the JAO.

(7) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in quashing the notice u/s.148, when the fact remains that as per Sec.144B(1) (iii) of the Act, the assessee shall be served notice u/s.143(2)/142(1) by the Faceless Assessment Centre (FAO), and in this FAO has not been given any power to issue notice u/s.148, which power has been given only to JAO, as per Sec. 148, as substituted by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021, whereby the Assessing Officer (JAO) shall serve on the assessee notice u/s.148, subject to the provisions of Sec. 148A of the Act, before making any assessment / re-assessment / re-computation u/s.147 of the Act.

(8) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in quashing the notice u/s.148, when the fact remains that as per the provisions of Sec. 148 of the Act, before making the assessment or re-assessment or re- computation u/s.147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is required to issue notice u/s.148 of the Act, after satisfying himself as per the provisions of Sec. 148A of the Act, that there is 'information' in his possession which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and that such 'Information' to enable the Assessing Officer to ascertain that the income has escaped assessment, is available with the JAO only and not with the FAO.

(9) For these and such other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing and it is prayed that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) may be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer restored.”

C.O.No.15/CHNY/2026 (by Assessee) 5. Since we have decided the appeal by dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue as above, this Cross Objection Appeal filed by the appellant becomes infructuous, accordingly Cross Objection appeal is hereby dismissed.

Sd/- Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 14th Aug, 2026 SGR, Sr.PS

आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem. 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “ए” ब�च, चे�नई / DR, ITAT Chennai. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. GANGADHARA Digitally signed by GANGADHARA RAO SALEELA RAO SALEELA Date: 2026.08.25 15:31:25 +05'30'