High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) · Judgments and reasoned final orders
Jai Bhagwan v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 & Ors.
Writ Petition No. 12892 of 2025 ·
Section 148 reassessment notice issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after 29.03.2022 quashed following Hexaware Technologies Ltd.
1. FACTS OF THE CASE
The petitioner challenged an impugned notice under section 148 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after 29.03.2022. Counsel for the Revenue cited the Delhi High Court judgment in T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (WP(C) 1968/2023, dated 28.10.2024) to argue that both the JAO and FAO possess concurrent jurisdiction.
2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT
Following the binding Division Bench ruling in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT, (2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay), the Court reiterated that after 29.03.2022 a notice under section 148 can only be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) and not by the JAO.
3. JUDICIAL DECISION
The Court set aside the impugned section 148 notice and all proceedings/orders emanating therefrom, granting liberty to the Revenue to revive the petition by praecipe if the Supreme Court sets aside Hexaware Technologies Ltd., with an automatic stay of the notice upon any such revival.
4. OUTCOME
In favour of the assessee (Jai Bhagwan); section 148 notice set aside.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
AKHB analysis: JAO-issued section 148 notices post-29.03.2022 are consistently set aside across all benches of the Bombay High Court under Hexaware Technologies Ltd., while preserving all other merits challenges to the reassessment notice in the event of Supreme Court reversal.
Source and verification
Reviewed from the complete 3-page official High Court judgment PDF (20260123_HCBM030413212025.pdf, SHA-256: f6666780d072fd178af54ce6c50ad9db41b1de3aca3259206767e514116aa4eb).
Original PDF: 3 pages · SHA-256: f6666780d072fd178af54ce6c50ad9db41b1de3aca3259206767e514116aa4eb
Supplied source-reviewed note retained; original bytes and identity validation checked in this release. Substantive re-review is not claimed for this record.
Refers to the Income-tax Act, 1961 and allied statutory rules/circulars as applicable to the relevant assessment years.
No subsequent Supreme Court reversal or stay is recorded in the source judgment text.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
AI-assisted source review. Independent human approval is not represented.
General research only. Read the complete judgment and verify applicable law and subsequent treatment before reliance.