ALI UNJHAWALA ASGAR,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

Facts

The assessee, an individual and partner in M/s. TAS Trading Corporation, purchased property and made unexplained cash deposits in AY 2018-19, without filing an income tax return. The AO initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 148A/148, making additions for unexplained investments and cash deposits under Sections 69A and 69, which were subsequently upheld by the CIT(A). The assessee challenged the jurisdiction of the JAO to issue the reassessment notice.

Held

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, quashing the assessment order passed by the AO. The Tribunal held that the assessment order, issued consequent to a notice under Section 148 by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after 29.03.2022, was without jurisdiction and unsustainable. This decision relied on rulings from the Hon'ble Telangana High Court, which established that JAOs lack the power to issue Section 148 notices post-introduction of the Faceless Assessment Scheme. The Tribunal noted that while the issue is pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court's decision is binding.

Key Issues

Whether the assessment order passed by the AO under Sections 147, 144, and 144B is valid when the underlying notice under Section 148 was issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after 29.03.2022, considering the Faceless Assessment Scheme.