Sanyukta Raje Bhonsle v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4 (4), Nagpur and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Section 148 Income Tax Act, 1961 notice issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer versus mandatory Faceless Assessing Officer; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench follows its own decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. [(2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)] despite pending Supreme Court challenge with no stay; notice and consequential proceedings/orders set aside; Rule made absolute; revival by simple pursis if SC overturns Hexaware, with stay on notice upon revival; petition decided 14.11.2025; Writ Petition No. 6756 of 2025; petitioner Sanyukta Raje Bhonsle; Judges Anil L. Pansare and Raj D. Wakode.
What did the court decide?
Rule made absolute; the impugned Section 148 Notice and all proceedings or orders emanating therefrom set aside; writ petition disposed of with no order as to costs; liberty reserved to the respondent-revenue to revive the petition by filing a simple pursis (no separate application needed) should the Supreme Court overturn the ruling in Hexaware Technologies Ltd.; upon revival, the operation and enforcement of the impugned Section 148 Notice shall remain stayed until further orders and the petition shall be decided on its own merits considering the multiple other grounds raised; no question of revival if the Supreme Court dismisses the Special Leave Petition against the Hexaware decision.