> v. Income Tax Officer & Anr

$~79 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 13149/2025MEHAK JAGGA.....PetitionerThrough:Mr.AbhimanyuJhamba,Mr.ThonpinaoThangal,Ms.AyushiSrivastava, Advs. versus INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. .....Respondent Through:Mr. Shlok Chandra, SSC, Ms. NaincyJain, JSC, Ms. Madhavi Shukla, JSC,Mr. Anshuman Jindal, Advs. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYALO R D E R%28.08.2025 CM APPL. 53902/2025(Exemption) 1.Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 13149/2025 CM APPL. 53901/2025(Stay) 3.This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “a. Writ of Certiorari or Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari,or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 / 227 ofthe Constitution of India quashing Notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 25.06.2025for AY 2019-20; b. Writ of Certiorari or Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari,or any other appropriate Writ,Order or Direction under Article 226 / 227 ofthe Constitution of India quashing the order u/s 148A(3) of the Act dated25.06.2025 for AY 2019-20; c. A Writ of Prohibition as Writ, order or direction in the nature ofProhibition, or any other appropriate Writ, order of direction under Article226/227 of the Constitution of India restraining the Respondent from continuing with the reassessment proceedings during the pendency of thepresent petition; and..” 4.The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 25.06.2025passed under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] andnotice dated 25.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, relatable to theAssessment Year [‘AY’] 2019-20 primarily on two grounds: (i)that the proceeding for re-assessment has been initiated byjurisdictional Assessing Officer [‘AO’] and not by faceless AO who iscompetent. (ii)that even on merits, no case has been made out by the revenuefor calling for re-assessment by issuing notice under Section 148 of theAct. 5.At the outset, the learned counsel states that for the purpose of thispetition he shall only press his first submission, that is, the jurisdictional AOhad no power to initiate the process of re-assessment. He clarifies that thesecond submission is not being pressed. 6.The submission (i) being the only submission advanced by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner, suffice to state the issue has been settled by thisCourt in the case of TKS Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO Ward 25(3) New DelhiNeutral Citation 2024: DHC: 8330-DB and the same is binding on us. 7.In this regard, he has also fairly drawn our attention to order dated23.01.2025 in WP(C) No. 13229/2024 PC Jeweller Ltd. vs AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax and Anr wherein a coordinate bench of thisCourt by relying upon TKS Builders Pvt. Ltd (supra) has dismissed thepetition in the following manner. “1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under:“Issue writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari or any other“Issue writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing of: (a) the notice dated 09.08.2024 issued by Respondent No.1 undersection 148A(b) of the Act; (b) the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by Respondent No.1 underSection 148A(d) of the Act; and (c) the notice dated 29.08.2024 issued under section 148 of theAct, for assessment year 2018-19, and all proceedings/actionsconsequent thereto for assessment year 2018-19” 2.The petitioner has premised its challenge to the impugned notices issuedunder Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) andSection 148 of the Act on the ground that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer(JAO) did not have the jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under Section148A and 148 of the Act after issuance of the Notification dated 29.03.2022by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) requiring reassessmentproceedings to be conducted in a faceless manner. (b) the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by Respondent No.1 underSection 148A(d) of the Act; and (c) the notice dated 29.08.2024 issued under section 148 of theAct, for assessment year 2018-19, and all proceedings/actionsconsequent thereto for assessment year 2018-19” 2.The petitioner has premised its challenge to the impugned notices issuedunder Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) andSection 148 of the Act on the ground that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer(JAO) did not have the jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under Section148A and 148 of the Act after issuance of the Notification dated 29.03.2022by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) requiring reassessmentproceedings to be conducted in a faceless manner. 3. The said issue is covered against the petitioner by the decision of this courtin T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 25 (3) New Delhi,Neutral Citation:2024:DHC:8330-DB. 4. The petitioner seeks to reserve the rights and contentions to urge the samebefore the concerned authorities. 5. The present petition is accordingly dismissed. 6. It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties to agitate theother issues before the concerned Income Tax Authorities, are reserved.” 8.Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. The application having becomeinfructuous, is also dismissed. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J AUGUST 28, 2025tg ANISH DAYAL, J