Kings Pride lnfra Proier:Ls^pvt Ltd v. Dtector 12-2

Petition under sectron 1 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Notice u/s.14g of the rncome- tax Act dated 28.08.2024 for A y 2021-22 vide DtN No trBA/AST/S/i4 B 1t2OZ4_ 251106807065't(1) issued by the JA0(.tst respondent) instead of FAO. COUNSEI fOr thE PEtitiONEr: SRI A.NARASIMHA SARMA, ADDL. SOLICITOR OF TNDIA/ M/s_ RUTUJA PAWAR/ SRt DUNDU SASHANK fUnNnlOXeX Counset for the Respondent Nos,1 & 2: SRt pinviefv KUMAR sENtoR Sc Counsel forthe Respondent No.3; .*,-o_ouE?X#?Rff ffi, ,r. SoLIcIToR GENERAL oF II.iDIA W.P.NO:28497 0F 2024 Between: GBR Freight Forwarders l^ul .!td. 4O2,4th Floor. j_1O_14, lechnooolis. tsegumpet, Hvderabad - s00016 n"p .-'uv it,'oir!"toi Sri drr" 6iil"ii# Ajay, S/o. Sri i R Bala Chandran ...PETIT|oNER AND The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle_3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad SOOOb? ...RESPONDENT Petition under Articre 226 0f lhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass ah order or direction, especialry one in the nature of wRrr oF MANDAMUS hording that the order passed by Respondent u/s.148A(d) of the Act, dt.27.09.2023 with DtN and Letter No |TBA/COM/ F t 17 t2OZ3_24t1 05661661 1(1) and the notice dated 27 -og.2oz3 issued under section 148 of the Act with DrN and Letter No.lrBA/coMrFr17r2o23-z4r1os662og38(i) for the assessment year 2019- 20, as being irregar, arbitrary and passed in gross vioratjon of principres of naturar justice without application of mind, and consequenfly set aside the same. lA NO; 1 OF 2024 5 Petition under section .r 51 cpc praying rhat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in supporl of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the operation of the notrce issued by the Respondent u/s.148 of the Act, d127 .09.2023 for the assessment year 2O1g_2O with DIN and Letter No.ITBAJCOMtFt1Zt2O23-2411056620938(1) and ail consequential thereto. proceedings Counsel for the petitioner: SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM counser for the Respondent: SRr PRAVEEN xu-iaan sENroR sc . FOR INCOME TAX W.P.NO:267 88 0F 2024 Between: l\//s. R D Sates. presenr Address. plot No. 1OlA, 731 . M. B. Road, prem Nagar, New Dethi.110044 p,"rio* nioi.r."'6'lOicz, Dev Naqar, Karot Derhi 110005 Rep, ov iis iartnei si'iiiraansar, si6 Late sri R'Stsl::5 ...PET|T|oNER AND '1. Ihe princioal Commrssroner of lncome Tax (Central), Aayakar Bhavan, ^ Basheerbagh, Hyderabad 50000;"'- '|u^ \ve z. tne Assrstant Commissioner of lncome Tax. Central Circle _ .l(4), Bhavan. Basheerbash nvot,iuioJodob?' ". Aayakar ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in lhe nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS hording that lhe order passed by 2nd Respondent u/s..r4BA(d) of the Act' d1 06 05 2024 with DrN and Letter No. rrBfucoM/F/1 7t2024- 2511064670245(1) and the notice dated 06.05.2024 issued under section 14g of the Act with DrN and Norrce No. rrBtuAST/Mr14B 1t2024-25t1064670455(1) for the assessment year 2O2O-21 , as being i egat, arOitrary and passed in gross violation of principres of naturar justice without apprication of mind. and consequen y set aside the same. lA NO: 1 oF 2024 () Petition under section'151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the notice issued by the 2nd Respondent u/s_148 of the Act, dt 06 05 2024 for the assessment year 2o2o-2'r with DrN and Notice No. lTEtuAST/M/148 1t2024_25t1064670455(i) and ail consequential proceedings thereto. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI A.V.RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondent: SRI PRAVEEN XUfrAAn SENTOR SC . FOR INCOME TAX W.P.NO:12 437 oF 2025 Between: Arene Life Sciences pvt ltU, having its Corporale offrce at 3_5g, Main Road, n' s o z o a z ii Ji 3rT*"Bi,$:l'e^i?1x"ps l1'.'E',1' ; H;v;;;$;;* ri i' n s " ...PETITIONER centre Government oi lnoial j";#;;;iit'J;i,Mils AND 1. Assessment Unit lncome Tax Department. Natronal Faceless Assessment ^ Saviki Nagar New Dethi - fi00ti2 z Assistant commissioner of rncome Tax, circre-g(1,1. Hyderabad siqnature 3. Union of lndla, Rep b.y its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of rv,r,>r.,y (, Btock B, press Enctave, I"#"Ji.ii'rffi :lf #ffi A?ll;opp-b"I;;;'l'i;'d;;;:S;iiiilUaliilliivrnrr Frnance, North Block New Delhi tibooT- - ' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Arlicre 226 0f the constitution ot rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavil filed therewrth, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or Direction more particurarry in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugnert notice dated 28_03_2025 having DIN and Notice No. rrBA/AST/S/148r2024-2st1or518826i(j) issued u/s 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 by 2nd respondenr for Ay.2021-22 as being without jurisdiction, without authority of raw, arbitrary, iregar, unjust and vioratrve of Articres 14, i g (1) g and 265 of Constitution of India anci consequen y set asrde the same. I t IANO:1O F 2025 7 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to r'mpugned notice dated 28-03-2025 having DrN and Notice No. rrBA/AST/st148r2024-25t1075.r88261(1) issued u/s. 148 of the lncome Tax Act. 1961 by 2nd respond ent for A.y.2021_22. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI MOHD MUKHAIRUDDIN counser for the Resoondent Nos.1 a z' rv,..'l.slruIina, senton sc FOR rrD counset for the Respondent No.3: SRt cADi ijiiv"ieru KUMAR. Deputv . Solicitor General of lndia W.P.NO: 9561 oF 2025 Between: Yli"#ti::':i"1ff nffi l,i,ftmT,,ua[.#"tttr-rsti#i,J Occ. Business. plc [iJ53rro,B33r."ol1rr1;o;'"""'fil"ii'd - soods5 -'-'6rru- AND ...PET|T|oNER . Ji:',?:',li*.3,.o##..i3?:,,'(,?'rncome tax' centrar circre - 1(1), Aavakar ...RESPONDENT Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issued a direction, order or writ more particurarry one in the nature of wRlr oF cERTloilARl seeking to quash the impugned Notice in DIN and Notice No-ITBA/AST/St14B 1 t2)23_24t1063755282(1) tssued under section 148 of the Act dated 31 03.2024 and consequentiar notice in Din and Notice No. issued under section 142(1) ofthe Act dated 22 03 '2025 by the Respondent for Ay 2020-21 against the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal and non_est. ,rBA/AST/F/142(1)r2oz4-2st1074887658(i) lA NC: 1 oF 2025 Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to ,\ s dispense with the production of the impugned the impugned Notice in DrN & Notice No:lrBA/AST/s/148 112023-24110637s5282(1) rssued under sectron 14g of rhe rncome Tax Act, 1961 (Act') dated 31.03.2024 and consequentiar notice in Din & Notice No. ITBA/ASTrFt142(1)r2024-2sr1or48g7658(1) issued under section 142(1) ot the Act dared 22.03.2025 by rhe Respondent for Ay 2020_21 pending disposal of the writ petition and thus render justice. lA NO:2 oF 2025 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay all further proceedings, pursuant to the impugned the tmpugned Notice in DIN & Notice No:lrBtuAST/s/148-1/2023-24t10637ss282(1) issued under section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, r961 (Act) dated 3i o3.zo24 and consequentiar notice in Din & Notice No: rrBA/ASTiF1142(j)r2oz4-25t1074881658(1) issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 22-03.2025 by rhe Respondent for Ay zozo-21passed by the Respondent pending disp6sar of the writ petition and thus render justice. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI K.GOVINDA RAO counsel for the Respondents: SRr PRAVEEN KUMAR sENroR sc FOR INCOME TAX W.P.NO:145 49 oF 2025 Between: Sesha Reddv Sadda, S/o .S. Sundara Ramaiah Aged 12. Occ. Business RIo s sundara Ramaiah pro,.ro 7olp,*i*,'ii""?,"iLt B. Janardhana Hirs, Road No.0S, Gachibowti, K v nr"grieJov,'ieiaiiana' soooe AND ...PET|T!ONER

1. Union of lndia. Ministry of Finance, lncome Tax Deparlmenl. New Delhi. 2 The office of Commisiioner, tncome i;; il;;,il""r. Minrsrry of Finance, ^ Government of lndia, New Detn, J. tncome Iax DeDartment, Office of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, . Centrat Circle - 1(1) Hyderabad 4 tncome Tax Officer, Ci:ntral Circle _ .l (.1) HyderabaO 5 Shyam Kumar Supaur, centrai ijir.r" ' iiiir""''" o. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Deparlment Central Crrcle 1 ( 1 ) - - v^ vvHqr r' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit fired therewrth, the High court may be pleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the actions of Respondent Nos 4 to 6 in issuing Impugned Notice dated 29.OB 2024 bearing No. |TBA/AST/S/14 B_1l2}2i 22511068113391(1) under section 148 of the rncome Tax Act as being viorarive of E-assessment of lncome Escaping Assessment scheme, 2022, notified vide Notification dated 29-03-2022 bearing s o No 1466 (E) and without jurisdiction and being violative of petitioners fundamentar rights enshrined under Articre 14 of the constitution of rndia and to consequenfly set aside rmpugned Notice and a, olher Orders and proceedings passed/initrated pursuant to lmpugned Notice. lA NO:1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151. CpC praying that rn the ctrcumstances stated in High Court may be pleased to 29 08.2024 bearing No under Seclion 148 of the lncome and proceedings passed/in itiated the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the suspend the lmpugnej Notice dated |TBA/AST/S/1 4 I _1 t2024_225t1 068 1 1 339 1 ( 1 ) Tax Act and to suspend all Orders/Notices pursuant to lmpugned Notice pending disposal of the Writ petition counsel for the petitioner: SRr K.S.S.K.v.RAGHAVA REDDY FoR M/s. MyrRr counser for the Respono"r, n.ll,'r'#H'or counser for the Rbspondent Nos.2 ,o?:'ii*'l;fffE'Ji?,1tfi1, sENroR sc KUMAR, Deputy 'RAVEEN I FOR ITD W.P.NO:146 640 F 2025 Between: Sesha Reddv Sadda. S/o S S_undara Ramaiah, Aged 12. Occ_ Business, Ri/o S Sundara Ramaiah. ptot r.ro zoiZ af'Eilr"|.,'i.rliE];'an",onuna Hifls, Road No 05, Gachibowti, K.v. nangaredOy,'i"irii""r'li6bdS AND 1. Unron of lndia. Ministrv of Finance, lncome fax Department, New Delhi. 2 The office of commis6ion"I: t.;;;; il; b"iirt"r-,i"r Mrnistry of Finance, '- "'r .-vHu^rrrur I Government of lndia, New Delhi. ...PETITIONER IO Uentrat Circte - 1(1) Hvderabad 3 llco.mg Tax.Department, Offrce of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, 4. lncome Tax Offlcer, Cenlral rlircle - I (1) Hvderabad 5 Shyam Kumar Supaur, Central Circle - 1'(i)' 6. Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Departmeirt'Central Circle - i(.1)AAYKAR _el,gy^"1 opposite L B Stadium, B'asher Bagh, fiyleraUaa, T;t;r;;"; ' ' 500004 R4 to RG Both are same address ...RESPONDENTS . Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the afficravit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to grant an order, direclron or writ, more so in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in issuing rmpugned Notice dated 29.o8 2024 bearing No. rrBtuAST rsr 148 _1 r2o24-2sr io6}11 3392( j under Section 148 of the lncome Tax Act as being violative of E-assessment of lncome Escaping Assessment scheme, 2022 nolified vide Notification dated 29.o3.2022 bearing S o No. 1466 (E) and without jurisdiction and berng viorative of Petitioners fundamental rights enshrined under Article 14 of the constitution ot lndia and to consequenfly set asicre rmpugned Notice and a[ other orders and proceedings passed/initiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice. ) I IANO:1OF2 02s Petition under section 1 5 r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit fired in support cf the perition, the High court may be preased to suspend the lmpugned Notice dated 29 OB.2O24 bearing No. lrBtuAsT/si 148_1r2024-2s11068113392(1) under Section .l48 of the rncome Tax Act and to suspend aI orders/Notices and proceedings passed/initiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice pendrng disposal of the Writ petition. I counsel for the Petitioner: SRr K.s.S.K.V.RAGHAVA REDDY FoR M/s. MyrRr INDUKURU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy courrier ror the Respondent Nos.2 ,o?:'!i*tTf;ilEJio]{,llflX, sENroR sc FOR ITD I II w.P.NO 14674 0 F 2025 * Between: Sesha Reddv Sadda,. S/o Sundara Ramaiah , Aged 72, Occ: Business, R/o S Sundara Ramaiah,pd N;;;Eiir,"ii""5i,,'rt .e,- Janardhana Hitrs, hoad No.05, Gachibowti, x v nangi[odv],'iera"n"qaia sooor AND ...PETIT|oNER 1 Unron of India. ,,",-:,,g,91 Finance lnc_ome Tax Department New Delhi 2 The Office of Commislioner, tncomel"ib.il ^ Coveinmeni,oiihji", New Dethi 3. lncome Tax Deoart , centrat circre -'r1rfr-[l[' 4. lncome lax Officer Central Circle _ .l (1) Hyderabad 5 Shyam Kumar Supaur, Central Grcte I ;,/;\r""' o Assessment Unit tncome Tax.Departmehi,C"ntrut Circle _ .l (i ) Aavkar Bhava n, opp. L B. sradium B;.[";;il;,' iivi="iroro, l_etansa na_560004 R4 to R6 are same address office of the Assistant commissioner of lncome Tax, rrtmenr, t4inistry of Finance, i ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 df lhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the, affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so rn the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the actions of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in issuing rmpugned Notrce dated 01 01 2023 bearing No. ,rBA/AST/sl148-1t2023-24t1058394213(1). under section 14g of the rncome Tax Act as being viorative of ,E-assessment lncome Escaping Assessment scheme, 2022' nori'ed vide Notification dated 29.03 2022 bearing s o No 1466 (E) and without jurisdiction ,no o"ing ,iol,r" of Petitioner's fundamentar rights enshrined under Artrcre 14 of the constitution of lndia and to consequenry set aside rmpugned Notice and a, other orders and proceedings passed/in itiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice, IA NO: 1 oF 2025 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the lmpugned Notice dated Ol .12.2023 bearing i lTBA/AST/Si 14 8 1/2023-2411058394213(1) under section .148 of the tncome Tax Act and to suspend a, orders/Notices and proceedings passed/initiated pursuant to lmpugned Notice pending disposal of the Writ petition. No. t2 counsel for the Petitioner: SRr K.s.s.K.V.RAGHAVA REDDY FoR M/s. MyrRr INDUKURU Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 To 6: sRr PRAVEEN KUMAR, sENroR sc Solicitor General of lndia FOR ITD W.P.NO:1 2473 0F 202s Between: M/s.TA lnfra Proiecls Lim*ed, ?.Nq Z-l_Sq, Flat No.101, 1st Floor, Amrutha Business .Comptex. Ameerpet, _Hyderabad'SOO- OiO. n.p by its Manaoino , '- "-"-y...v Director Mr rvt [4 Rehman aqeo'ss ye;ri FnNr. nasblar 1bE ...PETITIONER AND I Jlr. Qgpqty Commrssioner-of tncome, Tax, Circle_2(1), Hyderabad. 2 The chier commissroner or rncome iiiJn;;;i;i fffi,is-, A16Icuaros, - Masab Tank, Hyderabad S00 004. J. lhe Deputy Commissioner.of lncome Tax, Central Circle_1(3), Aayakar , p,!gv^ n. 7rh Ftoor. Basheer6ash, nvouridrot'tidbbe 4. r ne Assessment Unit lncome Tax Department National Faceless Assessment centre Ropm, ruo aot lzri-JF'i;;;:'Eii;;p Jawahartat Nehru. Stadium, Dethi i 10 0031 (4th Respondent is not necessary pafi) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue wrir of ,Vrandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or Direction decraring the action of the 3rd Respondent in passing the Assessment order, dated 21 .03-2025 under section 147 0I rhe rncome Tax Act, 1g61 , for the Assessment Year 2o2o-21 consequentry issuance of Notice under section 14g of the lncome Tax Act, 1961 by the 1st Respondent instead of Faceress Assessment by the 4th Respondent and consequentiar penarty proposed under section 270A and 271AAC (1) of lncome Tax Act, 1961 in the Assessment Order, dated 21 03 '2025 by the 3rd Respondent, as void, iilegar and contrary to the provisions of the rncome Tax Act, 1 961 , without jurisdiction and in vioration of principres of Naturar Justice and Rure of Law, against Articre 14, 1g(1)(g) of the constitution of lndia and consequenry ser aside the Assessment order, dared 21 .o3.2o25 passed by the 3rd Respondent and consequentiar penarty proposed under Section 270A 271AAC ('l) of lhe lncome Tax Act, .1961 by the 3rd Respondent in the Assessment Order, as null and void _, IANO:1O F 2025 Petition under Section '1 5'l cPC praying that rn the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to grant Stay of a' further proceedings, in pursuance of the Assessment order, dated 21 03'2025 passed by the 3rd Respondent under section 147 0f the rncome Tax Act' '1961 and consequentiar penarty proposed under section 270,-,271AAC(1) of the lncome Tax Act, -1961 in the Assessment Order, daled 21 .03.2025, for the Assessment year 2O2O-21, pending disposal of the above Wrif petitio., as otherwise, the petitioner will be put to severe loss and hardship. COUNSEI f.r thE PEtitiONEr: SRI G.NARENDRA CHETTY FOR SRI S.K.JEELANI counser for the Respono"",r, #ltlsrNrrHA, sENroR sc FoR rrD The Court made the foltowing: COMMON ORDER THE HO N'BLE SRI JU STICE P.SAM OSHY K THE HON 'BLE SRI JUSTIC AND E NAR SING RAO NA NDIKONDA WRIT PETITIO N Nos.2664s 26654 t4549 14664 AND I2437 9s6l 26667 28497 26788 of 2024 674 12873 of 2025 1 COMMoN ORDIIR: (Pcr the Hotl bl,e Sn .lustice P.Som Kosh)') These are batch of writ petitions involving the same tssue' fhcrclirre. ther are clubbed together and are being dccided by this contmtltt orcler Ileartl Nlr A. Narasimha Sarma' learned Additionat Solicitor of 2. Inrlia. Ms. Ruttria l)awar. leamed counsel' along with Mr' Durldu Sashank iVIartnlohart. leamed counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition Nos.26(r45, )6(t51, ?'6667 of 2024; Mr' A'V' Raghtr Rarn' learned counsel tirL the pctitioncr in Writ Petition Nos 28497 and 2(r7U8 ol- 2024. Mr. Mohd. Mukhairuddin, leamed counsel for the petitiorrcr irr Writ I'etition No l2437 ol 2025; Mr' Govinda Rao' leamed counsel Iirr tlr,-' 1'rctitiorrcr in Writ Petition No'9561 of 2025' N4r' K'S S K V' Raghlva Rccldr - leamed counsel' r'epresenting Ms iVlltri lndtrkuru' lcarnccl coutrsel lbl the petitioncr in Writ Petition Nos' 14549' I 4664 and l;l(r74 ol' 2025 and Mr' G'Narendra Chetty' lcamed cottnsel' Pagc 2 of 24 representing Mr. S.K. Jeelani Basha, leamed counsel for the petitioner Writ Petition No.12873 of 2025. Mr. praveen Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel lor the Income Tax Department lor the respondents in Writ Petition Nos.26645, 26654, 2666j, 29497, 267gg ol 2024, 12437,9561, t4549, 14664 & 14674 ot 2025; and Ms. J.Sunitha, leamcd Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax l)epartment fbr rhe rcspondents in Writ petition Nos. 12773 & 12437 o1202 5

3. 1-he primary challenge in all these writ petitions is to the notice undcr Section lzlS of rhe lncome Tax Act, l96l (tbr short .the Act,) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (for short .JAO,) each of thc writ Jrctitions. 'the chailenge is firstly, the JAO not having jurisdiction to issuc the irnpugned notices and the notices ought to have been issued by rhe l.aceless Assessing Officer (for short ,FAO,) and, secondly, thc impLrgned notices being in contravention to the cxplanarion ro Scction t5lA ol'tl-re Act and also in violation ol the e- Assessmcnt .f'Inco,re Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 read rvith thc notificarion ol- thc central Board of Direct Taxes (for shorr, rhe '(IBDT') dated 29.03 2022. Page .i of 24

4. The notices in this batch of writ petitions rvere in relation to cases assigned to "central charges".

5. The question lbr consideration in this batch of writ petitions is "rvhether- in cases assigned to "central charges" the notice issued under Section 148 of the Ar:t could have been issued by JAO or it ought to have been as per the amendment carried out w.e.f.

01.04.2021 in a taceless manner?"

6. So lar as, whether a notice under Section 148 of the Act on or afier 01.04.202 I has to be issued mandatorily by the FAO is not contended or disputed by either of the parties, as the said aspect stands decided in a large number of writ petitions by tl.ris Fligh Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindta Reddy vs. The Incomc Tax Officerl The said view was also lollowed by many other High Courts and the issr-re arising out of all the High Courts is seized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a large number of S.L.Ps. prefered by the Income I'ax Department 1 Writ Petition No.25903 of 2022 & Balch, decided oo 1-4.O9.2O)3 "-iL Iraee .1 of 24

7. All the lcarncd counsel lor the petitioners primarily relied upon the aloresaid judgment of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra) and which was subsequcntly also made applicable in the case of "intemational chargcs" by thc Division Bench of this High Court in the case of Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle l(1), Hyderabad and Othcrs2, whcrcin again the core question raised for adjudication was whetlrel the show-causc notices under Section 148 of the Act in rnatters relating to "international charges" would stand exempted or' excluded fionr the lhceless procedure and has to be quashed only on that ground tl. Apart tionr the aloresaid judgment, the learned counsel lor the petitioners also rclicd rrpon the judgment of the Bombay High Coun dealing rvith sirnilar circurrstances in the case of Hexaware Technologies Limitcd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax anr.l Others t . flo*eucr, in all these writ petitions, the counsel rcpresenting the Inconte Tax Department vehemently contended that Petrtion No 13353 of 2024 & Barch, decided on 24.O-i.2024 2Wrrt t 1zoza1 au trR 430 {Bomi these cases since assigned to "central charges". thcre is slight difference on lacts and law so lar as the applicabilitl' of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra) at the first instittrce, and Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola (supra) in the second instance, and they wanted to distinguish and contend that this batch of writ petitions would be an exclusion or an exc'eption so far as thc proceedings to be drawn in a faceless manner is concemed.

9. Mr'. A. Narasimha Satma. Iearned Additional Solicitor Gcneral ollndia led the arguments on behallof the Incorrc .l ar l)epartment in all these writ petitions.

10. It was the contention of the learned Additional Solicitor (ieneral that in all the writ petitions br:forc this Couft whclc tlte cases pertain to central charges has arisen fiom the search and scizLrrc procccdings initiated by the Income l-ax Depanment. It was also the contention that the proceedings initiated or arising out of a sertrch and scizure cannot be equated with the normal assessment l)r()ccedings drarvn under the statute. It was also thc contention that a lhcclcss proceeding is to be adopted in casc ol'a normal regular assessmcnt proceeding and not where the proceedings have been drawn subsetluent to search and Page 6 o12,1 scizure. It rvas also contended that unless the notices in these cases are r.rot issucd b,'.' the JAO, the Deparlment would find it extremelv dilllcult in adhering to the requirement of law under Section l53D of' the Act l l. Reading through the provisions of Section l53D ol the Act, the leamcd Additional Solicitor GeneraI contended that in order to ensure compliancc as is required thcrein, it would become necessary lor the proceedings to be initiated althe first instance by the JAO and, it was tn this contcxt, that these notices have been issued and the same tlrerelore cannot be found fault with and the petitioners do not have any clairr and thc writ petitions are liable to be dismissed

12. lt was the funher contention of the leamed Additional Solicitor Ceneral that recently the Cu.iarat High Court in the case of Talati and Talati LLP vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incomc-tax{ held thal noticc under Scction 148 of the Act in a laceless manner as per the schen.rc fiamed by notification dated 28.03.2022 cannor be applied to cases olscarch and scizure under Section 132 of the Act and, in such circunrstances, it would be the JAO who is required to rccord his "120241 167 tar-ann com 371 (Gutarat) Pagc 7 trf 1-1 satisfaction on the basis of the material collected during thc course of the search.

13. Leamed Additional Solicitor General also relcrred to a recent decision of the Delhi I{igh Court in the case olT.K'S' Builders (P') Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer5. wherein reiterating thc r ierv expressed by the Gujarat High Court itr the case ol-Talati and Talati LLP (supra), the Delhi High Coun had disrnissed thc batch ol' writ petltlons.

14. According to the learned Additionai Solicitor General for evaluation of data, there is a mandatory requirement of JAO and when it is a case arising out of search and sciz-ure. keeping in i'iew the provisions of Section l53D ol-the Act, the salest infi're ncc that can be drawn is that there is a concurrent.iurisdiclion availablc on the JAO as also the FAO and for evaluation of the data also thc services of JAO would be required. It was also contended by the lcarned Additional Solicitor General that the provisions of the t\ct have to be irnplernented keeping in consideration thc harmoniorts constluction s 2024 scc onLine Del 7508 Page 8 ol24 and tliat the provisions ol the statute has to be applied by giving a benefi cial constructlon.

15. It was contended by the learned Additional Soticitor General that clause (i) of Sub-section (l) ol Seition l44B of the Act requires that the National Faceless Assessment Centre shall assign the se lected cases for the purpose ol laceless assessment through autotnated allocation system. Ctause (i) of Sub-Section ( I ) of Section l44B olthe Act for ready reference is reproduced hereunder: " (i) ttte Nttt iont l'-rtceless Asscssmenl Centre shall assign the case .telected Jbr lhe purposes offoceless assessmcnl under this seclion lo a specific ($scssnrcnl trnil through utt uutonuted alloctttion sYstem. ''

16. Lastly, it was contended by the leamed Additional Solicitor General that in cases of "central charges", there is no requilement to conduct proceedings under Sectiotr l48A of the Act and hence the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act in case ol "ccntral charges" cannot be issued on automated allocation system'

11. Flaving heard the learned counsel for the parlies' panicularly the learned Additional Solicitor General extensively' it would be necessaly at this juncture to take note of the decision rendcred in the I Page 9 ol24 case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (supra) wherein the Division Bench of this High Court in a batch of rvrit petitions, has held in paragraph Nos.i5 to 38 as under: "35. ln view of thc aJbrcsaid drsc u.r.s irt tts. il is b)' nttvr verv clear lhal the procedure to be follotted b); lhc respondenl- Department upon treating thp nolices isstted for reo:Jessmenl being under Section I48.,1, the subsequent proceeding.t vas mandalorily required to be underlaken uruler the sub.\tiluted provisions as laid dotutt under the Financc .,ltl. 20)l ln tha absence of which, v,a dre conslroine(l to loltl r hut the procedure adopted by lhe re-sltondent- Deparlmcnl is in controt)ention lo tie slolule te. lhe Finuncc.4c1. 20)1. ut lhe rtr$ inslonce. Secondly, il is olso in direct conlravcntiotl lo lhe directives issued by the Ilon'ble ,Suprcnte ('ourl in thc cose oJ' .4s his h Agarwal, supra.

36. For all the oforesaid reu.sons, thc impugnttd rutticcs i:;sued and the proceetlings drawn b1i llrc rcsporulenl- Deparlmcnt is neilher lenuble. nor suslainahle Thc rutlicc.s srt issued and thc procedure adoptcd being per sc illcgol. de.serves lo be and are accorclingly set oside/quushctl

37. \-he preliminarlt ohiection rai.sed b.l lhe pelitrttner is suslained and all tha.ve v,rtt pelilio s sttuuls ullowul on lhis very lurtsdictional issue. Since the impugned noticc.r urul orders are getling quoshe.l on lhe poinl of jurisdictittn. we orc not mclned lo proceed .further and decide the olltr issues raised b\, lhe petilioner which staruls rcservecl to he raised and conlended in an appropriate proceeding,s Page l0 of24

38. Since the llon'ble Supremc Courr hatl, in fhe case ol Ashish Agarwal (l supra) as o one-line meo-\ure exarci-sing lhc pou,ars under Article 142 of the Constitution of lntlia. pernzilted the Revenue to proceed under the substiluted prot'ision.s, untl this Courl aLlotting lhe. petitions only on the ltrotedural fla+r, the right conferred on tlu Revenuc u,ottltl renain re.seryed lo proceed {urther if they s() reant -from the slage o1'lhe order oJ the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi_;h Agorw (l supra). "

18. From the aforesaid judgrnenr and the principles ol which have been r-eiterated in a large number of writ petitions subsequenrly filed, it would be evidently clear that the view of this High Court and the ratio laid down was that on and after coming into force of the Finance 4ct,2021 w.e.f.01.04.202 l, and with the introduction of the arne'durent to Section r4g of the Act wherein it was envisaged that the assessments have to be done b,v way of an automated faceless mechanism, all proceedings of assessment drawn subsequently have to be by fbtlowing the same mechanism. Further, the Hon,ble Suprcme C'ourt in the case of IJnion of India and Others vs. Ashish Aga rwa16, in very categorical terms has held as under: "Thus, the ne*- provisions s.ubstitutetl by the Finunce Act, 202l being remedial and benevolent in noltffe ond sub.ttituled with a 2022 SCC OnLine SC 543 Page ! I ol'24 sl)cci/ic dim ond object to protect the rights and interest of lhe assessee as v,ell as and the same being in public inttrast, the raspective lligh Courts have rightly held thot the benc/ir ol nev, provi:'ions shall be made avoiluble cven in re:pt'tt of tlrc proceedings relaling lo past uss6smtnt ycdts. I)tot,ided saclion 118 notice has been issued on or afier April l. 2021 We are in complete agreemenl tith tht t,iet' tukt'n h) the various High Courts in holding so Ilowever, al lhe some time, the judgmenls of Ihe seven ltigh Courls would result in no rea.tsessmenl proceedinq.\ Ltt oll even iithc same are perntissihle under the Finance Act. 2021 und us per substiluled sDctions 117 The Revenue cannot be ntade remediless and lhe ohftct und purpose ofreassessmenl proceedings conrutt be.frustrt rd. lt is true thol due to a bona fide mistake and in viey, oj sub-sequcnl exlension of time vide vorious nolifications. the Revenuc issucd the impugned nolices under section lJ8 after thc oncrulnrcnt t,us enlorced with effect from April l. 202 l. undar thc unamencled section 148. ln our viev' theSante ought not to have been issued under the unamended Act und ought to hayc haen issued under lht substiluled provisions ofsections lll n.t l5l of the Income-tat Act as per the Finance Act. 202 I Thert dppeors to be genuine non-applicoliotl ctf the anendntanl.s u: the of/icers of the Revenue mo] how heen under u httnt .fitlt beliaJ'that the amendments moy not yel hove been enfbrctd. 'l he re-fore, v'e are of the opinion that sonte leeu'a! mu.st ba shov,n in lhal regord whic'h the High Courts could hut'e done so Thcreforc, inslead o.,f quashing .tnd sellitlg usida tlt re sses.\menl nolices issue'd under lhe unomended provision.s ['agc l2 of 24 of the Income-tar .,lct as those deemed to hate 6""n 1rrrr", under section laSA of the [ncome-tar Act as per lhe nctt, provi5ion5 ty' section I48A and the Revenue oughl to huve been permitled to proceed .further with the reassessnent proceedings as per the subsliluted provisions of sections 147 to l5l of the lncome-tax Act us per the. Finunce .4cr, 2021. subject to complionce o/ all the procedurol requirements and lhe defences, n'hich may be auailable to lhe assessee untler the .sub.slituted provision.s oJ'sections t 47 to I 5 I of the lncotne_tax Act trnd u,hich ntay be uvailable under lhe l|nance Au. 2021 and in lav,. There.fttre, we propose to modifv the irulgment..s and orders passed by the respective High Courls o., tmder: (, (i, Thc respective impugned section l18 notices issuetl to the respective ,s.re.ssee-r shalt be deemed to have heen issued under section 148,4 of lhe lncone-tar Act us substituted b),the Finance Act, 202t und rrcatctl tLt hc shov,-cause notices in terms of sectiotl 14g,4(U Thc respective Assessing O.fficers shall u,ilhin thirtl, tlays Jrom todoy proyide to the asseessees the infrtrntatiort and malcrial rtlied uptn by the.Revenue so lhat tllc (Ltscessees can reply to the notices wilhin h+,o y)eek, the r eafter; T'he requirement oJ conducting dny (.nquir! ujith th? prior approval of the specified outhority under section 148A9(a) be dispen-red with as a onetime mea.sure vis_tt vis lhose nolices which haye been issuetl untlar .tecliorr 118 of the unumended Acl from April t. (iii) The Assessing Of/icers shall therea.fier pass nn order in lernlt oJ scction 148A(d) ofter .[ollot,ing the duc Page li ol24 l)toLcdure as requiretl under seclion l48A(b) in respect oJ cach of the concerned ossessees " . '

19. Following the aforesaid iudgment of the I-lon'ble Suprcme Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra), it has been emphatically held by the Division Bench of this High (lour1 in the case ol Ravindra Reddy (supra) that there is no furlher dispute to be adjudicated so t-al as what is the mechanism which has to be applied for assessment lre- assessnlenl er,eu il it is fbr assessment of previous years if the proceedings have been initiated on or after 01.04.202 l' It has to be only through automated t-aceless mechanism and no other way'

19.1. Hence, the question of law as framed in the earlier paragrapl-r of this order is "u,hether in the case oI central charges, could the afbrementioned principles of law be deviated and whether the proceedings drawn uncler the central charges could be b;' the JAO or it too has to be in a taceless uanner?"

20. l-he CBDT in respect of the same had issuecl a notiilcation dated 29.03.2022 in exercise of its powers under Sttb-Section ( l) and (2) of Section I -5 I A of the Act and, framed a scheme' which fbr ready referencc is reploduced hereunder: I Page )4 ol 24 MINISTRY OF [INANCE (Departmcnt of Revcnuc) (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT ]'A>{ES) NOTIFICATION Neu, Delhi, the 29th March. 2022 S.O. 1466(E):- In exercise of rhe powers conl'erred by sub_ sections (l) and (2) ofsection l5lA of the Income-rax Acr, lg6l (4j ol 196l). the Central Govemment hereby makes rhe fbllowing Scheme, namely:- l. Short title and commencement:-- ( I ) This Scherrc rna1,. bc called the e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme. ?.02). (2) It shall come into force with effecl from rhe dare ol' its publication in the Official Gazette.

2. Definitions: - (i) In lhis Scheme, unless the conrext otheru.ise requircs. (a) "Act'' means rhe Income-ra.\ Acl, l96l (43 of l96l ); (b) "automated allocation" means an algorithn fbr randomised allocation of cases, by using suitable technological tools, inclucling artificial intelligence and machine learaing, with a vierv ro oprimis; the use of resources. (2) Words and expressiolrs used herein and nor defined. but tleflned in the Act. shall have lhe meaning respectivelv assigued to them in the Act.

3. Scope of the Scheme:- For the purpose of this Scheme._ (a) assessment. reassessmeut or recomputation under section 147 of the Act. (b) issuance of notice under section l4g of the Act, shall be through automated allocation, in accordance rvith risk management strategy formulated by the Board as relerred to in section 148 of the Act for issuance of notice, and in a faccless lnanner, to the extent provided in section l44B of the Act r.i,ith reference to making assessment or reassessment of total income or loss of assessee. (Emphasis supplied) Page l5 of 24 2l . Similarly, the CBDT earlier also vide order dated 06.09.2021, in exercrse ol its powers under Section I l9 of the Act introduced certain exceptions / exclusions to Section l44B of the Act. The said order dated 06.09.202 I. lor ready rel'erence is again reproduced hereunder Section l448(2) of the Income 'I'ax Act. 196l I 448. Facclcss Assessment: (l) (2) Thc faceless assessment under sub-section (l) shall be made in respect ot'suclr territorial ar!-a- or persons or class of persons. or incomes ol elass trl'incontes- or cases or class ol cases, as may be specified b1' the Board- (Emphasis Supplicd) csor,. o.a". dared 06.0g.202 t.No. I87ll/2020-ITA-I (lovernment of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue (Crntral lloard of Direct Taxes) ***++ North Block, Nerv Delhi Dated, the 6th September,202l. ORDER Subiect:- 196l (the Act) p rovidins exclusions to section l44B ofthe Act. Order under scction I 19 of the Income-tax Act -fhe F'aceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 (the Scheme) has been incorporateci in the Act vide the 'faxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment ol Certain Provisions) .A.ct. 2020 Section 14{B of the Act pertaining to Iiacclcss Assessmenl has been inserted by the said anrendment w.e.f. 0l .04.2021 .

2. 'fhe Cential Boirrd of I)irect Taxes vide Order F No.I87i3l2020- ITA-I dat,.-d l3th August. 2020 (the Order) rcad with order undcr Pagc l6 oI24 section Il9 of the ,qct regarding ntutatis mutandis application of Orders, Circulars etc., issued in order to implcment thc Schentc t<r Faceless Assessnrent u/s l44B of thc Act, i .t to. t g7l;l2OZt)-ltn_ t datcd i I sr Mar-ch. 202 I directed thar all thc Asscssment Orrlers shall be passed by the National l'acelss Assessment Centre Q.JaFAC) u/s 1448 of the Act except as under:_ i. ii. Assessment orders in cases assigned to Central Charges. Assessment Orders ir.r cases assiglcd to International I.ax (-hargcs." (Emphasis Supplied)

22. A plain reading ol rhe aforesaid order dated 06.09.202 I conjointly with the rlotificarion dated 29.03.2022 ,"vould go ro show that the CBD'| has in fact carvcd out two exceptions so lhr as impler.enti,g the scheme of faceress assessment. 'r'hose two exceptions are (i) assessment orders in cases assigned to central charges; and (ii) assessment orders in cases assigned to intemational tar charges. So lar as the assessntent ol.ders in cases assigned to international tax charges, recelrtly the said exception was under challcnge in a batch of writ petitions before this High Courr in the case of Sri Venkataramana Retldy patloola (supra). White deciding thc said batch of writ petitions, the Hon'ble Division Bench hearing the said writ petitions took note of the order dared 06.09.202 l and notiflcation dated 29.03-2022 and in very categoricar rerms herd in paragraph Nos.23, 24,27 and 29 as under: l'age I7oll'l " 21. lr i.t noteworthv Ih t tlrc order of CBDT dctted 06.09.20: I dtals v'ith as.scssnrcnl orders . The .ruid order i.s pa.tsed in ararcisc ol 1t<ttr t'r undcr Section l44B oJ lhc Act. 'fhe orlr.'r of <)BD7 i.s tlaar that tlirection wus isstu:.l dboul passing o/ ussc.\s1tc,1t ordars b,l, tlrc National Faceless ,4ssa::m?nt ( t'nlrc untltr Saction llJB of lhe Acl erci:pl in nt,o stluetions. ona of vhich ts passing o/.rtssessnrcnl urders rn cascs ussigncd lo lntcrnalional 'fax Charges. 21 l'hus, rherc i'; rut ttn'ir ol doubt that Section l14l) of the Att ttttl ttrder of' ('BDT lated 06.09.2()21 give exemption fittn lollowing tht nouiulor.t .laceles.r procedure o b) in ralation ttt ptrssing ol as.\t?.\smenl orders in coses of cenlral churges and in'lcrnational lur charges Ar) other inlerlyL'lution woultl umounl lo doing violcnce rtith lhe kurguagt tntplolvtl in thc scheneinolificulion dated )9 0i.)():.1, Sccrrun llllit2l oJ rhc Act and ordcr dated 06 ()9 20-'I Sinca rtt our viar . thc plain and unantbiguous Ionguogt' usal in tlt .tt'lttme und order dated t)6.09 2021 sho,l.; thrtt thL' ntttitt' tndtr \c'clirttt lJ8 does not Jbll wilhin the 'ertclttio,t' the ludenenls cited by the learned Senbr Standtng ('rnrnscl lbr lntonrc Tut Deparlment are oJ' tlo tts.sislun<:t, The linytl cr i.s nov hare distmguished beltvecn i\iRl: unl lndtun ( tti:ans l'hc tnticc issued under fecti<tn l.!8 must compl.v with the tequiremenl oJ the Schcme wlrcther or not tlt' 'l'axpoS,av is Nl,'lilndion Citizen. Thus. lht second litth ol ur ,tltnat ol th( i(rrnul .\enior Stattding Lounscl /,tr lntonc lur Dcpartnrnt Llcserves to be rejected. Page l8 of24

27. Wc orc in respat:tfirl dgrcement yvith lhc viey, taken bt.the Bombuv Lligh Court and are o/ the opinion thot the aforesoid underlinetl expression used in clause 3(b) of the schemc dated 29 03.2r))) locs not preclude the mandatory _faceless procedu'e [itr is.ttrttnce of trclicc under Section 148 of tha Act. Atttt othcr int crpre tutio,t. in our hunfile view, will nol only cause violencc lo the Iunguagc u.sed, bul w,ill ulso defeat the object for v.hith o tronsporent faceless procedure' was tnlroduce() Ilencc. tr,c are ttnabte to persuode ourselves lo occept o di//erent neoning lhon lhe literol meaning.flotving and conte),ed /)-om the provisions.

29. ln viav ,r/ /orcgting anulysis, it is clear thr.tr the re\pondent.\ have ,erred in not .following lhe mandatory -fat'clc.rs procedure us prescribed in the -scheme dated 29.03.202.'. Since nolices uncler Section llB of the Acr w,ere nol is.sued tn u lhtcless manncr. lhe enlire furlher proceeding ./buntlcd upon it aild us.\e.\smenl orders stand vitiated. Thus, the irnpugned nolices under Section 118 of the lct anci all con.tequ(nliol u.\'e.\\tnent 0rderS based thereupon are set aside. l.ibcrh, is rtstrved lo the respondents to proceed ugtrittst, thc petitioner.y in accordance with law.,'

23. A plain reading ol paragraph Nos.23 and 24 would make the plcture very clear so far as the fact that even though the batch of writ petitions in the case Sri Venkataramana Rcddy patloola (supra) were primarily pertaining to assessment orders in cases assigned to international tax cltarges, but the Division Be,ch has also d;alt w,ith Page I9 of 24 the aspect of the assessment orders in cases assigned to central charges as well holding that it r,r,ould not make any diff-erence rvhether it is cases assigned to central charges or cases assigned to international tax charges. What was held was that, once when the statute substantially mandate having the assessment proceedings clrawn through automated scheme hllocation in a laceless manner, subsequently there does not seenl to be an1, exceptions carved out permitting the JAO to issue procecdings under Section 148 of the Act

24. In view of the sdid view expressed by the Division Bench of this High Court in the case of Sri Venkataramana Rcddy Patloola (supra), we are of the considered opinion that, il at all il we accept the analogy canvassed by the Income Tax Department. that by itsell- would be diluting the mandatc of the l-lon'ble SupFemc Court in thc case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) and at the sarne time it would also water down the series of writ petitions where the proceedings were issued by JAO and this High Court while allowing the rvrit petitions had set aside those proceedings.

25. The entire basis of the learned Additional Solicitor General seems to be the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of r' l'age 20 of 21 T.K.S. Builders (l'.) Ltd. (supra). However, since there is an authoritativc decision on thc said issue by this very High Courr, the judicial proprietl, rccluires lbr this [Jench to honor the view taken by the Divisiorr Bcnch ol'this High Court itselt-.

26. The llon'blc Suprerne Cor"rrt in the case of Commissioncr of Income 'l'ax, Bhopal vs. G.M., Mittal Stainless Stee! (P) Ltd.? dealing w'ith an issue of. not lollowing the judgment of the jurisdictional High Coun, held at paragraph No.9 as under: "9. .1put.fi-itm rht lttnguugc oJ Section 263 oJ the Income Tcu ilcr. if we \ett lo occapt rha :;ubmission of the appellont .thot the Rcvcnuc ..luthot itic.s tlithin the State cottld refuse lo follow thc iurisdit:tittnttl fligh ( ourt's decision on the ground lhut the dtti.st,trt o; unnc otlrr High ('ourt n,as peruling disposal h1, rhir ('ourt. it vtoull leud to an anarchic siluation wilhin lhc Slat(. l/ ut tfu tirnc vhcn lhe pov'er under,Scclion 263 was ererciscl tlit lttisirttr o/ thc lurisdrclional ltigh Court had rutt hecn stt trsitlt' lty lhis ('ourt or ot leasl futd nol been appcaled fi om. it tould not ba ope n lo lhe (:ommissioner to ltave proceedcd on lh( blt.sts lhot the High Court was arrontou\ ttntl that /1,(, rr.rdssi,?g offtcer who had acted in Itrtns o.f tht l!igh ('Lttu't's tleci.sion had acted erroneously. " 2003 11 5upreme Court Cases 441 t'agc 2 I o1'2,1 2'1. Apafl f,rom the effect of judicial propriety, rvc arc ol' the considered opinion that plain reading of the judgrnent ()l'the Hon'ble Suprenre Court in the case ol' Ashish Agarwal (suprlr) se enrs ro be more convincing and logical as compared to the -iudgntent l-reavilv relied upon by the learned Additional Solicitor (ir'nt:ral i.t-. the judgment ol'the Delhi High Codrt in the case olT.K.S. lluilders (P.) Ltd. (supla) 2ll. So f'ar as the ground'iaised by the learned Additional Solicitor Gencral that unless the'notices in cases penaining to central charges are issued by JAO it would be difficult to enfbrce the r-etlLrircnrent as is otherwise requirecl under Section l53D ol the Act is concerned, wc need to look into the provisions of Section l5il) as lo \\'har ir speaks for. For ready reference. the relevant portion of' Sr:ction l5.ll) is reproduced hereunder " 153D. Prior approval necessary for ossessment in ttscs or req uisition. i\io order of asscssmenl or reosscssmcnl shall hL' ptt.s.strl ln tttt ,4s.ressirtg OfJicer below the rank of Joint ('ontm i.\.\it )nt! r in respect of each ossessmenl yccu rcJerral to itt L'ltu.:r lb1 oJ [suh-scclion (l) ofl settion 153,4 or the osse.tsnent y(ur re_ferred to in clause (b) o[sub-section (l) ol .stt'tron l5i l). except vtith,lhe prior approval of thc Joint ('omntt.t.s iont'r. , / Page 2) of 24 A plain reading of the afbresaid Section would show that the provisions ol'Section l5lD would bc applicable in proceedings drawn under Section l5iA and Section l_<iB.

29. Section l53A of the Act speaks of how assessment in a case of search and seizurc or requisitiorr is to be made. For ready reference, the relevant portion of Section l53A is also reproduced hereunder: ' I 53,1. Assessment in cuse of search or requisition. (l )Notwithstonding arytthing contoined in section I 39, section ll7, settion l18. -section IJ9. saction l5l ancl section l-i3, in the cuse of o Jtctsoi t,here tt seurch is iniriakl under section I32 or b,tok.t of' ttccotrnl. olher doarmenls or ony ossets ore requisitioned unrler set.tion I 32A afier the 3 t st riay o.f May, 2003 [but on or hc.[ore the Jlst tto1,61.71orrr. 202.1J, the ,l.r.r cs.r'irg t )//icer shall (u) i.\.^ue rolice lo s.uch pcrson requiring him lo /irrnish within suth periotl, as may be speci/ied in tlrc rnlice lhc Nturn of- inctsne in respecl oJ euch ossestne t year Jdlting within sli assessmcnl ])eors and ./br the relevant usse.tsmcnl ),eur ot t.,enrc relcrred lo in clou.sc (b), in rhe prcscribetl ;form crnd verifed in the prestrrhed mannar and setting forlh such other purticulars as may be prescribed and rhe l.trot,isions of thi.r Acr slutll, .so Jir os muy be, upply accordingll, as f such return \rere o h (b) return required to be fttrnished under st:r'rirtn 139: assess or reds.te.s.s the total in((tmt ol .\t\ assessment years immediulely'prccaling t hrt assessmenl ye.r relcvanl lt) lht pr(\'ittlt\ t, 'it. ttt which such search is conducted or rtquisition i: made and for the relerunl os.\as:m(nt t(.t' t)t' yeors. " A plain reading of the afbresaid Section would clearlv indicate that though Section l53A is a non-obstante clause, but nowherc does the said Section speaks of an Exception carved out tiorrr Section I j lA. which in itself r'vas brought in by way of amendnrent to the irinance Act, 2021 w.e.t-. 01.04.2021. This in other rvords nreans tlrat until and unless there is a specific exception carved out fron'r the upplicability of Section 151A every assessment proceedings initiatctl cr e n il' it be a fier a search and seizure proceedings, even il it be uncler cettrr:rl charges or international tax charges, the provisions of Section l5l;\ is rvhat has to be adhered to for the purpose of initiating a prrocccd ing of a I assessment / re-assessment. Section l5lA also does not anywllerc say that the said provision of law shall be applica blc ln lt q tven situation ol under any other provision of larv t Pagc 24 ol24

30. In vierv of the sarne, wc are of the considereri opinion that the present batch of writ petitions also deserve to be and are accor<Jingly allowed quashing the impugned orders under challenge as they are in violation of the provisions Enacted by way of F inance Act, 202 I which came into lbrce u,.e.f. 01.04.2021. Accordingly, we hold thar the question of law flramed, as to ,.whether in cases assigned to centr.al charges and the notices issued therein lor reassessnrent courcr be issued by the JAo or it has to be in a faceless manner,, stancs decidccr in I'avour of the pctitioners holding that it can be i.r a faceress ,lanner alone and the question of law thus stands answered against the Itcveuue. No costs.

31. .A-s a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending il any, shall stand slased- \ To //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR 16\€" oFFrcER 1 2 4 5 r) 7 8 Deputy Commissioner of lncome-tax, Central Circle - 3(3), Hyderabad, AayakarBhawan, Opp. LB Stadium, Basheer Baugh, Hyderabad - 500004 Principle Commissioner of lncome{ax (Central), Hyderabad, AayakarBhawan, Bth Floor, BasheerBagh, L.B. Stadium Road, Hyderabad-500004 The Secretary, Union of lndra, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of lndia, North-Block, New Delhi-1 1000'1 The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500004, The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Central Circle - 1(4), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500004, Assessment Unit, lncome Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre Government of lndia, Jawaharlal Nehru lVarg, Block B, Press Enclave, Savitri Nagar New Delhi - 1'10002 Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad Srgnature Towers, Sy No 6(P) of Kondapur Opp. Botanical Gardens, Serilingampally (M) R.R.Dist., Hyderabad - 500084 The Deputy Commissioner of lncome tax, Central Circle - 1(1), Aayakar Bhavan Hyderabad - 500004 t5 Central Circle - 1(i) Hyderabad Government of lndia, New Delhi.

9. The Office of Commissioner, lncome Tax Department, I\,4inistry of Financ9, 10.lncome Tax.Department, office of the Assistant commissioner of lncome Tax, 1 1 . lncome.Tax Officer, Central Circle _ 1 (.1 ) Hyderabad 12.Shyam Kumar Supaur, Central Circle I t'ltt' - -- 1 3. Assessment Unit, lncome lax Departmeht'Central Circle 1( j ) AAYKAR plly^ut,opposite L.B Stadium, e'asher Aagh, tjyOeraUaO, ft6;g;;; "' 500004 lrilasab Tank, Hyderabad S00 004. l1 Jl " Pgp,lty Commissioner-of tncome, Tax, Circte_2(1), Hyderabad 15. The Chief Commissioner of tncome rix iniome rri fb*lr;;, a.C. Guards, 16 The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Taxi Central Circte_1 (3), Aayakar __ p.havgn, 7rh Ftoor. Basheerbash, HvOeradaOtOO boa r /. rne Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department National f-aceless Assessment Centre Room, No 401, Znd Floor, ERamp Jawaharljl Nehru. Stadium, Dethi 110 003. lB.One CC to SRI DUNDU_.SASHANK MANMOHAN, Advocate IOPUCI j9 9n" cC ro SRtS.K JEELANT BnsnA, Aavocai" ibpudi---,- --r ?9 9n" CC to M/s. MyTRt tNDUKunu, Aov-otate'iciFucl ?1 gne cc to sRtA v RAGHU RArvt, Adv;c;i;ib,eucl ' 22.One CC to SRt MOHD lrUKHrunUOOirV, AO'r"*te'[OpUC] ?? 9nu CC to SRt K.covlNDA Rno, Advociie tOnu'ii 24 one CC to M/s. J.SUN|THA, srruion 5C eo'n ir"o ioeucl 2s 9lp CC ro SRtA.NARAS|MHA SAnuA, norji's"Orrclron oF tND|A ?9 9n" CC to SRt PRAVEEN.KUJ\,AR, SENtoR SC FOR TNCOME TAX IopUCl 27 9Le c9 to sRr cADr pRAVEEN kuMAc, Dv c'r-r.rrii'iid"dr""' tNDtA [OPUC] .28. Two CD Copies -soLrcricin loPUCl . PSK BS I6 HIGH COURT DATED:14tlt|ZO2S COMMON ORDER I..P_. I9S' 26645,26654,26667,28491,26788 OF 2024 AN D 1 2437,956'1,1 4549,1.4664,1 467 4,1 ztt 3 0F 2oi5 oR THE S i (-) 't 2 4 il]l 2025 t1.(' :.. I :. li l'i/ siir.,=rrc.rlr:a) --::\-_i-:jr' ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS {