Facts of the Case
The petitioner, Ambience Farms Private Limited, filed a
writ petition challenging a notice dated 23.06.2024 issued under Section
143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with subsequent notices dated 10.07.2024
and 06.09.2024 issued under Section 142(1) for Assessment Year
2023-24.
The principal challenge was that the notice under Section
143(2) was issued by an officer who, according to the petitioner, was not a
“prescribed income-tax authority” and therefore lacked jurisdiction. It was
further contended that even if such authority existed, the officer could only
“serve” and not “issue” the notice. On this basis, the petitioner also argued
that the subsequent notices under Section 142(1) were barred by limitation and
without jurisdiction.
Issues Involved
Whether a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act
can be validly issued by a “prescribed income-tax authority” authorised by the
CBDT under Rule 12E, and whether such authority is competent to issue (and not
merely serve) the notice.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner argued that the expression “as the case may be”
in Section 143(2) implies that only the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction
over the assessee could issue the notice. It was contended that the prescribed
income-tax authority could not issue the notice and, at best, could only serve
it. The petitioner further submitted that the impugned notice was not issued by
officers of the National Faceless Assessment Centre and therefore was contrary
to the scheme of faceless assessment.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue submitted that Section 143(2) expressly permits
issuance of notice by either the Assessing Officer or the prescribed income-tax
authority. It was pointed out that under Rule 12E of the Income-tax Rules,
1962, the CBDT is empowered to authorise income-tax officers to act as
prescribed authorities. The Revenue relied on CBDT Notifications dated 12.05.2022
and 28.05.2022, which authorised the concerned Assistant
Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation),
Circle-1(1)(1), Delhi, to issue notices under Section 143(2).
Court Order / Findings
The Delhi High Court examined Section 143(2) and Rule 12E and
held that the statute clearly permits issuance of notice by either the
Assessing Officer or the prescribed income-tax authority. The phrase “as the
case may be” does not restrict issuance solely to the jurisdictional Assessing
Officer.
The Court held that Rule 12E explicitly authorises the CBDT to
empower income-tax officers to act as prescribed authorities, and the
notifications issued by the CBDT validly conferred such authority on the
officer who issued the impugned notice. The contention that the prescribed
authority could only “serve” and not “issue” the notice was found to be without
merit.
The Court further rejected the argument that only officers of
the National Faceless Assessment Centre could issue notices under Section
143(2), holding that neither the Act nor the Rules impose such a limitation.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that once a notice under Section 143(2) is
validly issued by a competent prescribed authority, the Assessing Officer is
fully empowered to proceed with assessment and issue subsequent notices under
Section 142(1). The scheme of faceless assessment does not invalidate
jurisdiction otherwise lawfully conferred by statute and rules.
Final Outcome
The writ petition was dismissed. The Delhi High Court
upheld the validity of the notice dated 23.06.2024 issued under Section
143(2) and the consequential notices under Section 142(1), holding that they
were issued within jurisdiction and limitation. All pending applications were
also disposed of.
link to download the order- https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770112676_AMBIENCEFARMSPRIVATELIMITEDVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXANR..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment