High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) · Judgments and reasoned final orders
Kalpana Ashok Tapse v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.
Writ Petition No. 565 of 2026 ·
Section 148 notice issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer set aside following Hexaware Technologies Ltd.
1. FACTS OF THE CASE
The petitioner, Kalpana Ashok Tapse, filed WP No. 565 of 2026 challenging a section 148 notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after 29.03.2022.
2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT
Following Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT, (2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay), and declining to follow the contrary Delhi High Court view in T.K.S. Builders Pvt. Ltd., the Division Bench held that post-29.03.2022 notices under section 148 can only be issued by the FAO.
3. JUDICIAL DECISION
The Court set aside the impugned section 148 notice and all consequential proceedings/orders, granting conditional praecipe revival liberty to the Revenue depending on the outcome of the Supreme Court SLP in Hexaware Technologies Ltd.
4. OUTCOME
In favour of the assessee (Kalpana Ashok Tapse); section 148 notice set aside.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
AKHB analysis: Companion family or group writ petitions challenging JAO-issued section 148 notices should each plead both the Hexaware faceless-jurisdiction bar and independent merits grounds so that Paragraph 7 protection applies if revived.
Source and verification
Reviewed from the complete 3-page official High Court judgment PDF (20260123_HCBM030523632025.pdf, SHA-256: c8ad7ed3cbb5cf1faf826f7eb115474b89476a60b22c97a695dd4d6b443a1d74).
Original PDF: 3 pages · SHA-256: c8ad7ed3cbb5cf1faf826f7eb115474b89476a60b22c97a695dd4d6b443a1d74
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.