आयकर अपील(cid:9)य अ(cid:10)धकरण, ’डी’ (cid:14)यायपीठ, च(cid:14)े नई।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI (cid:1)ी मनु कु मार िग(cid:12)र, (cid:14)ाियक सद(cid:18) एवं

(cid:1)ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद(cid:18) के सम(cid:29)

BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3070/Chny/2025 (cid:24)नधाtiरण वष/ti Assessment Year: 2019-20 SIDHAMPOONDI PA CULTURAL CO- v. ITO, OP BANK LTD S 1392, Ward-02, Namakkal, 2/173, main Road, Tamil Nadu-6370001 Kondarasampalayam Post P. Velur TK, Namakkal-637203 Tamil Nadu [PAN: AABAS 0168 F (अपीलाथ(cid:29)/Appellant) ((cid:30)(cid:31)यथ(cid:29)/Respondent)

अपीलाथ(cid:29) क ओर से/ Appellant by : None (cid:30)(cid:31)यथ(cid:29) क ओर से /Respondent by : Mr. ARV Srinivasan, CIT सुनवाईक तार(cid:9)ख/Date of Hearing : 18.12.2025 घोषणाक तार(cid:9)ख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

The captioned appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 12.08.2025 for AY 2019-20.

2. At the outset, we notice that the assessee by the ground No.2 challenges the JAO jurisdiction to issue notice u/s148 dated

30.03.2023 of the Act.

3. We note that Page No.1 of the assessment order which talks of notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 30.03.2023 and pointed out that the notice u/s.148 has been issued by the Income Tax Officer, WARD 2 NAMAKKAL/ i.e; (JAO). He further referred to CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 which formulated a Scheme called “the e-

assessment of income assessment scheme, 2022”.

4. The Ld.DR relied upon the impugned order and further, pleaded that CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is not applicable in the present case. He further relied upon para 8 of the order the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of TVS Credit Services Ltd. v. DCIT in WP No.22402 of 2024 & WMP No.13336 of 2023 which is as under:

8. Keeping open all rights and contentions of parties, including liberty to apply to this Court, in case the Revenue succeeds before the Apex Court, for revival of these petitions, the notices issued in these petitions are quashed and set aside.

5. We have heard the rival submissions perused the appeal papers and case law cited by the assessee. We find that the CBDT issued a Notification dated 29.03.2022 formulating “the e- assessment of income assessment Scheme, 2022”. The Scheme provides that (a) the assessment/re-assessment are re-computation u/s.147 of the Act and (b) 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 u/s.148 of the Act for issuance of notice and in a faceless manner to the extent providing in Section 144B of the Act with reference to making assessment/re-assessment of total income or loss of the assessee. We find that the impugned notice u/s.148 dated 30.03.2023 has been issued by the Income Tax Officer, WARD 2 NAMAKKAL/ i.e; (JAO) and not by the NFAC which is not in accordance with the aforesaid Scheme. We also find that the impugned notice u/s 148 has been issued after CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022. Hence, the aforesaid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case.

6. The Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has decided the controversy in favour of the assessee.

7. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in M/s Ta Infra Projects Limited Vs The DCIT [Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 26667, 28497, 26788 of 2024 and 12437, 9561, 14549, 14664, 14674, 12873 of 2025 dated 14.07.2025], following the judgments of the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO (2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) has set