Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Galaxy Breeding Farm, Represented By Its Partner Shir. Ameerul Murthuza – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition details and reliefs sought. (Para 1) |
| 2. contentions regarding the assessment order and prior judgments. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's analysis on jurisdiction and comparisons with previous cases. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. reiterating established legal principles on jurisdiction. (Para 10) |
ORDER :
S. R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
1. 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 25.03.2025 passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2020- 21 by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN & Order No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2024-25/1075024902(1) herein marked as Annexure - A1.
b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the computation sheet dated 25.03.2025 for the assessment year 2020-21 issued by the Respondent No.1 bearing DIN & Document No. ITBA/AST/S/530/2024- 25/1075024943(1) herein marked as Annexure - A2.
c) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari quashing the notice of demand dated 25.03.2025 issued under section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for
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.
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 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 for initiating proceedings under the Income Tax Act must comply with prescribed legal frameworks; failure to do so invalidates subsequent orders.
Assessing Officer lacks jurisdiction to issue notices post-faceless assessment scheme under Income Tax Act; all related proceedings quashed.
The court affirmed that assessment proceedings initiated without jurisdiction under Section 148 post-Faceless Scheme are void, quashing all relevant notices and orders.
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 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 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
