The Principal Commissioner Income Tax 1 Andanother v. Ghuge
High Court
19 Jul 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hcaurdb
Parties
The Principal Commissioner Income Tax 1 Andanother v. Ghuge
Date of order
19 Jul 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Principal Commissioner Income Tax 1 Andanother v. Ghuge, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
*1*
919wp12265o23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD
919 WRIT PETITION NO. 12265 OF 2023
PRADEEP TUKARAM KOKADWARVERSUS
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX 1 ANDANOTHER
...
Shri Raviraj R. Chandak, Advocate for the Petitioner.Shri Alok Sharma, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2/Department.
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
& Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE :- 19[th] July, 2024
Per Court :-
1.We have heard the learned Advocates for therespective sides. Several issues have been raised in this Petition,inter alia, that the impugned notice could not have been issuedby the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and which couldhave been issued in terms of the provisions of Section 151(A) ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Faceless Assessing Officer(FAO).
2.
The learned Advocates for the respective sides
*2*
919wp12265o23
submit that the judgment dated 03.05.2024, delivered at thePrincipal Seat in WP No.1778/2023 (Hexaware TechnologiesLimited Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax andOthers), settles this issue. The notice could not have beenissued, save and except by the Faceless Assessing Officer. If itis not issued by the FAO, this Court has ruled in HexawareTechnologies (supra), that such notice is unsustainable and,accordingly, the notice was quashed and set aside.
3.It is, thus, obvious that the ground of notice beingnot in accordance with the scheme framed u/s 151(A) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, the view taken in HexawareTechnologies (supra), would be applicable to this case.
4.
In view of the above and considering the
conclusions drawn in Hexaware Technologies (supra), the noticeissued u/s 148 would be unsustainable. The same is, therefore,quashed and set aside. If any further demand notice or penaltynotice in furtherance thereof, would also not survive and standsset aside.
*3*
919wp12265o23
5.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is
disposed off. Needless to state, all the contentions of both thesides, save and except, those which are covered by theHexaware Technologies (supra), and which are available to theparties in a proceeding, which can be initiated by the FAO underthe scheme framed u/s 151(A) of the Income Tax Act, are leftopen.
kps(Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
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.