YERRAMANENI APARNA,GUNTUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR, GUNTUR
Facts
The assessee challenged the validity of a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing it should have been issued by a Faceless Assessing Officer. Appeals related to penalties under Sections 270A and 271AAC(1) were also filed.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court had remitted similar cases to High Courts for adjudication on the jurisdiction of Faceless vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officers for reassessment notices. Consequently, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
The primary issue was the validity of reassessment notices issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after the introduction of the Faceless Assessment Scheme. The retrospective effect of amendments and the scope of Section 147A were also key considerations.
Sections Cited
Section 148, Section 270A, Section 271AAC(1), Section 147A, Section 148A, Section 149, Section 151
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, HON’BLE
PER OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM:
The above three appeals have inter-linked and inter-connected matters and hence, all the three appeals are clubbed and a common order is being passed. ITA Nos.213 to 2015/VIZ/2026 Veeramaneni Aparna
ITA No.215/VIZ/2026 filed by the assessee relates to challenging the validity of notice issued u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act“)
by the Juri ictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and ITA Nos.213 & 2
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.