Dinesh Chand v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 8, Pune and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bombay HC W.P. 98/2026 (B. P. Colabawalla & Firdosh P. Pooniwalla JJ., 21-01-2026), Dinesh Chand v. ACIT Circle-8, Pune & Ors: Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961 notice set aside; issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer contrary to mandated Faceless Assessing Officer route; held fully covered by Hexaware Technologies Ltd. V/s. ACIT circle 15(1)(2) [(2024) 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)], which the Court followed as binding despite SLP pending before Supreme Court (no stay); liberty to Revenue to revive petition by Praecipe without separate IA if SC sets aside Hexaware; automatic stay on notice upon revival; no revival if SLP dismissed; revived petition to be decided on merits (several other issues raised); rule made absolute, petition disposed of, no costs.
What did the court decide?
Rule made absolute; impugned Notice under Section 148 and all proceedings/orders emanating therefrom set aside; liberty to the Revenue to revive the Petition by moving a Praecipe (no separate Interim Application required) if the Hexaware Technologies Ltd. decision is set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, with a stay on the operation and implementation of the Notice upon revival until further orders, and no revival if the SLP is dismissed; on revival the Petition to be decided on its own merits; no order as to costs.