Sj Contracts Private Ltd. vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2025)

Sj Contracts Private Ltd. vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Rule made absolute; impugned Section 148 Notice and all proceedings/orders emanating therefrom set aside; Writ Petition disposed of in terms thereof with no order as to costs; liberty to Revenue to revive the Petition by Praecipe if the Supreme Court sets aside Hexaware Technologies Ltd on this issue.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, when the law mandates issuance by the Faceless Assessing Officer, is fatally defective and liable to be quashed.

Court's answer

The issue whether a Section 148 notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (rather than the Faceless Assessing Officer) is fatal is squarely covered by the Division Bench decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra), by which this Court is bound; the matter was therefore not kept pending despite the pending Supreme Court challenge to that decision (on which there is no stay).

Ratio / Principle

The impugned Notice issued under Section 148 and all other proceedings/orders emanating therefrom are set aside.

Key takeaways

Liberty is granted to the Revenue to revive the Writ Petition if the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) is set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue, by simply moving a Praecipe before this Court without filing a separate Interim Application.ratio¶25
If the Petition is revived and restored, it would have to be decided on its own merits, since several other issues challenging the Section 148 Notice were also raised.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax — Assessment — Notice under Section 148, Income Tax Act, 1961, issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer though law mandates issuance by Faceless Assessing Officer — Held fatal; issue squarely covered by Division Bench decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. V/S Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2) [(2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)], which this Court is bound to follow even though that decision is under challenge before the Supreme Court with no stay — Impugned Section 148 Notice and all proceedings/orders emanating therefrom set aside — Rule made absolute; Writ Petition disposed of; no order as to costs — Liberty to Revenue to revive Petition by mere Praecipe (no separate Interim Application required) if Supreme Court sets aside Hexaware on this issue — Revived Petition to be decided on its own merits, several other issues having been raised against the Notice. (Bombay HC, WP 8347/2025, Colabawalla & Pooniwalla JJ., 14 July 2025.)

72 wp8347-25.doc

Digitally signed by TRUSHA TRUSHA TUSHAR TUSHAR MOHITE MOHITE Date: 2025.07.16 11:33:01 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.8347 OF 2025

SJ Contracts Private Limited .. Petitioner

Versus

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(2) & Ors.

.. Respondents

Mr.Ruturaj Gurjar, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr.Ashok Kotangale a/w Ms.Smita Thakur, Advocate for Respondents.

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: JULY 14, 2025

P. C.

Rule. Respondents waive service. With the consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

The above Writ Petition interalia challenges the Notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on various grounds. One of the grounds is that the Notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer when the law mandates that it has to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer. This is a fatal defect and therefore the Notice has to be quashed, is the argument of the Petitioner.

Mohite

Page 1 of 3 JULY 14, 2025

72 wp8347-25.doc

It is the Petitioners’ contention that this issue is squarely covered by a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd. V/S Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2) [(2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)] .

On the other hand, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Revenue stated that though it is true that this issue is concluded by the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra), the said decision has been challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court is likely to take up the matter immediately on re-opening. He has fairly stated that there is no stay to the judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra).

Considering these facts, we do not propose to keep the matter pending in this Court. Once it is fully covered by the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) we are bound to follow it.

We accordingly set aside the impugned Notice issued under Section 148 and all other proceedings/orders emanating therefrom.

Page 2 of 3 JULY 14, 2025

Mohite

72 wp8347-25.doc

We however grant liberty to the Revenue to revive the above Writ Petition in the event the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) is set aside by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on this issue. We make it clear that it will not be necessary for the Revenue to file a separate Interim Application to seek a revival of this Petition and the same can be done simply by moving a Praecipe before this Court.

We also make it clear that once the Petition is revived and restored, the same would have to be decided on its own merits considering that several other issues are also raised challenging the Notice issued under Section 148.

Rule is accordingly made absolute and the Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms thereof. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

[FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

Page 3 of 3 JULY 14, 2025

Mohite