DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4 JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. DINESH KUMAR KHATORIA, JAIPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHES, ‘A’JAIPUR. BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 823/JPR/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19

DCIT Vs. Dinesh Kumar Khatoria Central Circle-04, S.B. 40 Khatoria Bhawan, Jaipur Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur (Appellant) [PAN :- ACMPK6568K (Respondent)

Appellant by Sh. Meenakshi Pareek, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Ajey Malik, CIT (Through V.C) Date of Hearing 01.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 12.08.2026 ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, JM:

This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal (in short ‘CIT(A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 ( henceforth the Act )dated 19.01.2026 which has emanated from the order of the ACIT, Central Circle-04, Jaipur passed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the I. T. Act, 1961 dated 25.03.2025.

I.T.A. No. 823/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 2

“1. Whether the decision of Ld. CIT(A) in quashing the notice u/s 148 as well as assessment order u/s 147 is liable to be set aside to CIT(A) and the appeal is to be decided on merit as retrospective clarificatory amendment is proposed in The Finance Bill 2026 vide insertion of section 147A providing that assessing officer for the purpose of section 148 and section 148A shall means and shall always be deemed to have meant to be as assessing officer other than the Faceless Assessing Officer. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in holding that notice u/s 148 is not sustainable legally relying upon the order of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Courts order dated 19.03.2025 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11787/2024 and several other linked petitions 3. Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in holding that notice u/s 148 issued by JAO in central charges is not sustainable in law in view of the CBDT Instruction dated 13.08.2020, 31.03.2021, and 06.09.2021 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend OR withdraw any of the ground of appeal during the course of appellate proceeding.

I.T.A. No. 823/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 3

income and reassessment proceedings continued after issue of statutory notice in course of which the assessee has filed submissions explaining the queries raised .

3.1 This information was forwarded by the DDIT, ( Inv ) , to the AO ( of the assessee ) on the basis of incriminating materials found and seized in course of search conducted u/s 132 of the Act,onRadha Mohan Maheshwari Group on 23.11.2021, contained in seized Pen Drives and entries recorded in (Excell Sheets) in the computer system of the said seized person and explained by the seized person in statement recorded u/s 132(4), regarding cash transactions entered into by the assessee with the said searched group . 3.2 Finally on the basis of information flowing from seized materials ( and pen drives ), seized from Radha Mohan Maheshwari group, forwarded to the AO of the assessee (the other person), the assessment was completed u/s 147 on a total income of Rs. 6.62 crores (with an addition of Rs. 5.85 crores u/s 69A , being advancement of alleged cash loan by the assessee plus interest earned on such loan amount being Rs.5.54 lakhs plus an addition of Rs. 35.51 lakhs received from dissolved partnership firm on distribution of assets).

I.T.A. No. 823/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 4

High Court dated 19th December, 2025 in DB Civil writ Petition No 20404 /2025 where the Hon’ble High court has held as under: “Admittedly, in this case, the final order was passed after the notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Although the faceless regime has been introduced. In view of the judgments passed in the cases of Jasjit Singh (supra) as well as Sharda Devi Chhajer (supra), the proceedings could not have been initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer nor the faceless regime could have later on passed orders. However, it is noticed that the appeal has been preferred against the final order and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for this Court to pass orders resulting in making the appeal redundant. In these circumstances, we direct the petitioner to file an application before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) who will take into consideration and pass appropriate orders accordingly." 5. Following the above directions of the Hon’ble High court, the Ld. CIT ( A ) cancelled the assessment order dated 25/03/2025 passed u/s 147,holding the same to be infructuous, in absence of a legally valid notice u/s 148 of the Act. 5.1 Neither the ld. AR nor the ld. DR has any objection if the matter is remanded back. 6. Subsequently, the Hon’ble Apex court( in the case of ITO v Tej Pratap Singh, vide order dated 10/04/2026), has set aside previous High court judgments on the issue of JAO / FAO , and has rendered all matters back to respective High courts for fresh adjudication , following retrospective insertion of section 147A ( effective

I.T.A. No. 823/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 5

April 2021 ) by the Finance Act 2026, defining an AO to mean an officer other than faceless units for issuing notices u/s 148 and 148A . 7. In the instant case since the proceedings stemming from disputed JAO notices remain stayed, while the Hon’ble High court reviews the case, and also considering the fact that in the instant appeal is not adjudicated on merits by the Ld CIT ( A ) on the grounds contained in form 35, we remand the matter back to the Ld first appellate authority, to take up the matter for adjudication on merits, as per provisions of law, after taking into consideration the outcome of the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the matter. 8. In the result the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 12.08.2026 in open court .

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (UDAYAN DAS GUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Akv Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T.