Facts of the Case
A batch of writ petitions was filed by Inder Dev Gupta and connected
petitioners challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act
by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer of Central Circle-2, Delhi. The
petitioners contended that after insertion of Section 151A and notification of
the E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022, reassessment
proceedings could be initiated only by the Faceless Assessing Officer and not
by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. It was argued that the impugned
notices and consequential proceedings were without jurisdiction and void ab
initio.
Issues Involved
Whether, after insertion of Section 151A and introduction of
the Faceless Assessment Scheme, reassessment notices under Section 148 can be
validly issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, whether centralisation
of cases excludes the application of faceless procedures, and whether dismissal
of SLPs by the Supreme Court against contrary High Court judgments nullifies
the binding effect of Delhi High Court precedents.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioners argued that Section 151A mandates faceless
issuance of notices under Section 148 and that CBDT notifications expressly
require reassessment proceedings to be conducted only through the Faceless
Assessing Officer. Reliance was placed on several judgments of the Bombay,
Telangana, Punjab & Haryana and Rajasthan High Courts holding that the
Jurisdictional Assessing Officer lacks authority to issue reassessment notices.
It was further contended that dismissal of SLPs by the Supreme Court in certain
cases amounted to affirmation of those High Court judgments, rendering the
Delhi High Court’s decision in TKS Builders per incuriam.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Revenue submitted that the Delhi High Court has
consistently held that both the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and the
Faceless Assessing Officer possess concurrent jurisdiction to initiate
reassessment proceedings. It was argued that dismissal of SLPs in limine does
not amount to declaration of law under Article 141 and does not override
binding Delhi High Court judgments. The Revenue relied on precedents including
TKS Builders, PC Jeweller Ltd., Mala Petrochemicals and Polymers, Mehak Jagga
and other connected cases.
Court Order / Findings
The Delhi High Court held that the issue stood settled
within the jurisdiction of Delhi by its decision in TKS Builders, which
recognises concurrent jurisdiction of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and
the Faceless Assessing Officer. The Court observed that dismissal of SLPs
without reasons does not amount to affirmation of High Court judgments or
declaration of law by the Supreme Court. Relying on settled Supreme Court
jurisprudence in Kunhayammed, Fuljit Kaur and Khoday Distilleries, the Court
held that TKS Builders continues to bind this Court as it has not been stayed
or set aside. The Court further noted that centralisation of cases does not
carve out any exception to the statutory authority of the Jurisdictional
Assessing Officer under Section 148.
Important Clarification
The Court clarified that unless the Supreme Court expressly
settles the issue by a reasoned judgment or stays the operation of Delhi High
Court decisions, the doctrine of concurrent jurisdiction laid down in TKS
Builders remains binding within Delhi. Dismissal of SLPs in limine does not
negate existing precedents.
Final Outcome
All writ petitions were dismissed. The reassessment notices
issued under Section 148 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer were upheld as
valid, and all pending applications were dismissed as infructuous.
Link to Download order- https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769502900_KAWATRATENTANDCATERERSPRIVATELIMITEDVsASSISTANTCOMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCENTRALCIRCLE16DELHI.pdf
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