DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4 JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MANOJ KALA, 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. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21

DCIT Vs. Manoj Kala Central Circle -04, 1334, Sangakon Ka Rasta, Jaipur Kishanpole Bazar, Jaipur [PAN:-AAUPK1919Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by Ms. Apeksha Kalra, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Ajey Malik, CIT (Through V.C) Date of Hearing 01.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 02.07.2026 ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, JM:

These three appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal – Jaipur – 5 ,(in short ‘(CIT(A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 ( henceforth the Act ) dated 16.01.2026 which has emanated from the order of the ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar passed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the I. T. Act, 1961 dated 28.03.2025.

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 2

The grounds of appeal taken by the revenue in the memorandum of appeal in form 36 are as follows: “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.

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. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 3

group, reassessment proceedings has been initiated vide issue of notice u/s 148 dated 20/03/2024 of the Act by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer ( after necessary approval from higher authorities ) in response to which return of income has been filed and assessment completed u/s 147 rws 144 dated 28/03/2025 on a total income of Rs. 1.70 crores. 4. The said assessment carried in first appeal before ld. CIT(A), Jaipur-5 has been challenged on the jurisdictional issue that notice u/s 148 has been issued by the jurisdictional AO (and not by the faceless Assessing Officer) which is contrary to the provisions of section 151A of the Act ( read with CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022). 5. The appeal has been allowed by the ld. First Appellate Authority on the jurisdictional issues by observing as follows:-

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 4

submitted herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-13. That vide Para 7 of the said order, the Hon'ble Court has directed as under:

"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 within a period of 15 days following the judgment already rendered by this Court relating to quashing of the proceedings based on the notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer."

B. and Jurisdictional Assessing Officers (JAO) have no authority or jurisdiction to issue notices under Section 148.

CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022

Statutory Faceless Assessment Scheme; and

Binding judgments of the Hon'ble High Court.

Thus, the proceedings are void ab initio, lacking inherent jurisdiction.

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 5

The Hon'ble High Court has held which is 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."

4.2 Conclusion:

In the above order Hon'ble High Court, Rajasthan has quashed the notices issued under Section 148 and the resultant assessment orders.

In these circumstances, the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the I.T.Act, 1961 under challenge in present appeal does not survive, the assessment order passed by the AO has become infructuous. Hence the ground of appeal challenging the legality of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act is hereby allowed.

In view of the above discussion and the facts of the case, the argument of the appellant is acceptable. Thus, the Ground of Appeal 1 is hereby allowed.

In view of the discussion, the subject grounds of appeal no. 2 to 7 raised by the appellant are treated as disposed off.

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 6

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 7

amended provisions, and all such questions are left open to be decided by the High Courts. 27. Finally, during the pendency of the writ petitions before the High Courts, there shall be an interim stay of further assessment/reassessment proceedings pursuant to the impugned notices, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the High Courts. 28. The High Courts are requested to decide the matters preferably by 30.09.2026. Learned counsel for the parties undertake to extend full cooperation to the High Courts in this regard. No adjournments may be granted by the High Courts on mere asking of the parties.” The Ld DR prayed for adjournment citing the above , that since the matter now sub- judice before the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court , we need to wait for the decision of the Hon’ble High court in the matter. 8. The ld. AR of the assessee present in the court also submitted that in the instant case the grounds of appeal contained in Form 35 has not been adjudicated on merits of the case by the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. First appellate authority has allowed the appeal of the assessee on the jurisdictional issue that notice u/s 148 of the Act issued by the jurisdictional assessment officer, is not legally sustainable and has allowed the appeal leaving the grounds on merits contained in form 35 unadjudicated. 9. However, he has no objection if the matter is remanded back to the ld. First Appellate Authority with the directions to keep the appeal proceedings in abeyance till the disposal of the legal issue by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court,and thereafter to proceed as per the directions of the Hon’ble Court in the said matter. 10. We have heard the rival submissions and pursued the material available on record and we find that the ld. First Appellate Authority has not adjudicated the

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 8

grounds of appeal on the merits and has allowed the appeal on technical grounds, following order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court dated 18.12.2025 in D.B Civil Writ Petition No. 19931/2025. 11. As such we are of the opinion it will not serve any purpose if the cases are adjourned before the tribunal, because if the legal issue of notice u/s 148, is decided by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in favour of the assessee, the entire re assessment proceedings u/s 147 , will automatically be quashed and if the matter is decided against the assessee by the Hon’ble court, then the grounds of appeal contained in Form No. 35 has to be adjudicated on merits by the Ld First Appellate Authority, which has not been done in this case. 12. As such in the interest of justice, and to arrive at a logical conclusion, we remand the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A), with directions to keep this appellate proceedings in abeyance till disposal of the legal issue by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court upon afresh consideration as opined by the Hon’ble Apex Court ( supra ) and thereafter, to dispose of the appeal by passing appropriate orders in view of the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court. 13. In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 14 ITA No. 820/JP/2026 ( Asst Year : 2021-22 ) The grounds of appeal taken by the revenue in the memorandum of appeal in form 36 are as follows:

“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

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 9

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.

The grounds of appeal taken by the revenue in the memorandum of appeal in form 36 are as follows:

“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 Honble 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

I.T.A. Nos. 819 to 821/JPR/2026 Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2021-22 & 2020-21 10

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (UDAYAN DAS GUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated 02.07.2026 * Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS 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. True Copy By Order