आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ (cid:1)यायपीठ, चे(cid:9)ई।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI (cid:1)ी एबी टी. वक(cid:10), (cid:11)ाियक सद(cid:17) एव ं

(cid:3)ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद(cid:9) के सम(cid:27)

BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1219/Chny/2025 िनधा(cid:14)रणवष/(cid:14) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Chahida Begam, v. The ITO, 5 A, Mulla Street, Ward-3, Pondicherry-605 001. Puducherry Range.

[PAN: BXEPC 1448 N (अपीलाथ(cid:22)/Appellant) ((cid:23)(cid:24)यथ(cid:22)/Respondent) अपीलाथ(cid:22) क(cid:26) ओर स / े Appellant by : Mr.Hithesh, Advocate (cid:23)(cid:24)यथ(cid:22) क(cid:26) ओर स े /Respondent by : Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT सुनवाईक(cid:26)तारीख/Date of Hearing : 11.08.2025 घोषणाक(cid:26)तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदशे / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)‘), Delhi, dated 26.07.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY‘) 2019-20.

2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee drew our attention to grounds of appeal preferred by it wherein assessee has raised a legal issue challenging the impugned notice issued u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act ‘) dated 29.03.2023 as bad in law and hence consequent passing of the assessment order by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘JAO‘) also is null in the eyes of law.

3. Legal issue is reproduced as under:

The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the passing of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the JAO was in complete defiance to the prescription of law / procedure in relation there to and hence ought to have appreciated that in the absence of valid foundation for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act, the consequential re-assessment should be considered as nullity in law.

4. According to the Ld.AR, the impugned notice issued u/s.148 dated 29.03.2023, is invalid and bad in law being issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (herein after ‘JAO’) which is not in accordance with Sec. 151/151A of the Act read with the faceless Scheme notified by CBDT on 29 March 2022 for assessment, reassessment or re-computation u/s.147/issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act or for conducting of inquiry or issuance of show cause notice or passing of order u/s.148A of the Act or sanction for issuance of notice under section 151 of the Act. Further, according to the Ld AR, in exercise of the powers conferred u/s.151A of the Act, CBDT had issued a notification dated 29.03.2022 [after laying the same before each House of Parliament] and formulated a Scheme called "the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022" (herein after ‘the Scheme’). And that the Scheme provides that (a) the assessment, reassessment or re-computation u/s.147 of the Act and (b)

the issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act shall be through automated allocation, in accordance with risk management strategy formulated by the Board as referred to in Section 148 of the Act for issuance of notice and in a faceless manner, to the extent provided in Section 144B of the Act with reference to making assessment or reassessment of total income or loss of assessee. Therefore, according to Ld AR, since the impugned notice u/s 148 dated 29.03.2023 has been issued by JAO and not by the NFAC, there is per-se contravention of the provisions of the Act, thus violating the principles of Rule of Law, which vitiates the reopening of the assessment; and further pointed out that this legal issue raised by the assessee has been answered in favor of the assessee by the jurisdictional High Court & other Hon’ble High Courts;-

5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC & JAO have got concurrent jurisdiction and therefore, n