Ashwani Kumar Hurkat S/O Ramesh Maheshwari Vs Additional… — Income Tax | Rajasthan HC (2025)

Ashwani Kumar Hurkat S/O Ramesh Maheshwari Vs Additional… — Income Tax | Rajasthan HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing and setting aside of the Section 148 notice dated 28th March 2023 and of the consequential assessment order dated 13th March 2024, with all rights and contentions kept open and liberty to Revenue to revive the notice if the Apex Court interferes with the judgments in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Sharda Devi Chhajer or Shree Cement Limited; all pending applications also stand disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 28th March 2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) is valid, and whether it should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

A notice issued under Section 148 of the Act by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not by a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) is itself not valid.

Ratio / Principle

As held by this Court in Shree Cement Limited, following Sharda Devi Chhajer and Hexaware Technologies Ltd., a Section 148 notice issued by a JAO rather than an FAO will be bad and not valid.

Key takeaways

The notice dated 28th March 2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act stands quashed and set aside, keeping open all rights and contentions of the parties and with liberty to Revenue to revive it should the Apex Court interfere with the judgments in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Sharda Devi Chhajer or Shree Cement Limited.ratio¶6
The consequential assessment order dated 13th March 2024 cannot be sustained and likewise stands quashed and set aside.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax – Section 148 notice – Issuance by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) – Held invalid. Following its own decision in Shree Cement Limited (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10540/2024, decided 05.08.2025, Jaipur Bench), which in turn followed Sharda Devi Chhajer and Hexaware Technologies Ltd., the Court held that a notice dated 28.03.2023 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by a JAO and not an FAO is bad and not valid. Accordingly, the notice and the consequential assessment order dated 13.03.2024 were quashed and set aside, all rights and contentions being kept open. Revenue was granted liberty to revive the notice should the Supreme Court interfere with the judgments in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. ([2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)) – as to which a Special Leave Petition had been preferred and notice issued – Sharda Devi Chhajer or Shree Cement Limited. Petition disposed; pending applications disposed.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4459/2024

Ashwani Kumar Hurkat S/o Ramesh Maheshwari, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 835, Nawab Sahib Ki Haweli, Tripolia Bazar, Jaipur 302003

----Petitioner

Versus

1. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-4, Income Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner	: Mr. PK Kasliwal with
	Mr. Priyesh Kasliwal
For Respondents	: Mr. Siddharth Bapna with
	Mr. Sarvesh Jain &
	Mr. Meyhul Miittal

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA

Order

03/09/2025

At the outset, Mr. Kasliwal states that the legal ground that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is not valid because it has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing Offider (FAO), has not been taken. Counsel states in the Court that petition is yet to be admitted and if the Court insists, petitioner will take out an application for adding grounds.

Mr. Bapna states that since this Court has taken a view that such a notice will be invalid, he will not insist on formal amendment in the petition.

[CW-4459/2024]

(2 of 3)

Ground referred to is that the notice dated 28^th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing Offider (FAO) and this Court in the case of Shree Cement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax & Others¹ following Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. The Income Tax Officer & Another² and Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2)³ , has held that such a notice will be bad and not valid.

At the same time, Mr. Bapna states that in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. ( supra ), Revenue has preferred a Special Leave Petition and notice has been issued. Counsel states that in view of the law as it stands today, Court may grant the prayer of petitioner but in case the Apex Court interferes with judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. ( supra ), Sharda Devi Chhajer ( supra ) or Shree Cement Limited ( supra ), then Revenue should be given liberty to revive the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.

Mr. Kasliwal states that in view of the above, for the present, petitioner will reserve his right to raise other grounds at an appropriate stage.

Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties, we quash and set aside notice dated 28^th March 2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act with liberty, as prayed.

Since we have held that notice issued under Section 148 of the Act itself is not valid, the consequential assessment order

1DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported) 22025 SCCOnLine Raj 3386

3[2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)

[CW-4459/2024]

(3 of 3)

dated 13^th March 2024 cannot be sustained and the same also stands quashed and set aside.

Petition disposed.

Consequently, all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed.

(MANEESH SHARMA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ

KAMLESH KUMAR-RAHUL/3