P.kumaresan v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
24 Jun 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
P.kumaresan v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
24 Jun 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In P.kumaresan v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The appeal is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2025
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
W.A.No.785 of 2025
&
C.M.P.No.6756 of 2025
P.Kumaresan
..
Appellant
Vs.
1. The Income Tax Officer
Non Corporate Ward 17(1) Room No.515, BSNL Building V Floor, Bsnl Tower 16, Greams Road
Chennai 600 006.
2. National Faceless Assessment Centre
Assessment Unit Ministry of Finance Delhi 110 003. ..Respondents
Prayer : Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 28.10.2024 passed in W.P.No.5606 of 2024.
__________
Page 1 of 5
For Appellant
For Respondents
:Mr.P.Mahadevan
:Dr.B.RamasamySenior Standing Counsel for Respondent-1
JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
This appeal impugns an order passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. The learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid.
3. Mr.Mahadevan submitted that this Court has, in many matters,
held, following the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Hexaware
Technologies Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax[1], that notice that has to be issued by Faceless Assessment Officer has to be issued by Faceless Assessment Officer and if issued by Jurisdictional
Assessment Officer, the same is not valid.
1[2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bom.); 464 ITR 430 (Bom.)
__________
Page 2 of 5
W.A.No.785 of 2025
4. Mr.Ramasamy, who takes notice for the Revenue, states that the law as proposed by Mr.Mahadevan is correct and therefore, the Court may quash and set aside the notices, but keep open liberty of the Revenue to re-ignite the notices in case the Apex Court interferes with the order and judgment of the Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies (supra).
5. Keeping open the Revenue's rights and contentions, as noted above, the impugned notices dated 04.04.2022 and impugned order of the learned Single Judge are quashed and set aside. The appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application is closed.
(K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ) (SUNDER MOHAN,J.) 24.06.2025
Index Neutral Citation
: Yes/No:Yes/No
kpl
__________
Page 3 of 5
To
1. The Income Tax Officer Non Corporate Ward 17(1) Room No.515, BSNL Building V Floor, Bsnl Tower 16, Greams Road Chennai 600 006.
2. National Faceless Assessment Centre
Assessment Unit Ministry of Finance Delhi 110 003.
__________
Page 4 of 5
__________Page 5 of 5
W.A.No.785 of 2025
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICEAND SUNDER MOHAN,J.
(kpl)
W.A.No.785 of 2025
24.06.2025
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.