Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
K.B. Bhojamma – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner requests certiorari for assessment order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. counsel for petitioner cites prior judgment for quashing notices. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court analyzes jurisdiction issues regarding assessing officer's authority. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
ORDER :
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the assessment order dated 21.03.2025 passed under Section 147 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2022-23 by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/147/ 2024-25/1074835563(1) herein marked as Annexure-A.1.
b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice of demand issued under Section 156 of the Act dated 21.03.2025 for the Assessment Year 2022-23 by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN & Notice No.ITBA/AST/ S/156/2024-25/1074835653(1) herein marked as Annexure-A2.
c) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the penalty notice dated 21.03.2025 issued under Section 274 r.w.s 270A of the Act for the Assessment Year 2022-23 by the Respondent No
The jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue notices under the Income Tax Act post-faceless regime is invalid, rendering the resulting assessments void.
The jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to issue notices under the Income Tax Act is annulled if the action violates procedural norms established by recent legislative changes.
Jurisdiction of the Income Tax Assessing Officer to issue notices post-Faceless Scheme's implementation is invalid as established by previous judgments, rendering subsequent orders quashed.
Jurisdiction for initiating proceedings under the Income Tax Act must comply with prescribed legal frameworks; failure to do so invalidates subsequent orders.
The jurisdiction for issuing notices under Section 148 post-Faceless Scheme lies solely with the faceless assessing officer, making actions taken by jurisdictional officers invalid.
The authority of jurisdictional Assessing Officers to issue notices under Section 148 post-faceless scheme is invalid, as it contravenes procedural mandates outlined in the Income Tax Act.
The court affirmed that assessment proceedings initiated without jurisdiction under Section 148 post-Faceless Scheme are void, quashing all relevant notices and orders.
Assessing Officer lacks jurisdiction to issue notices post-faceless assessment scheme under Income Tax Act; all related proceedings quashed.
Jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer under the Income Tax Act is limited post-implementation of the Faceless Scheme, invalidating notices issued under Section 148 after March 29, 2022.
The court ruled that assessments initiated by non-designated officers post-faceless scheme were illegal, underscoring the need for jurisdictional compliance under the Income Tax Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
