Delhi High Court on Jurisdiction for Issuing Section 148 Notices: JAO & FAO Have Concurrent Powers.

Headnote:

The Delhi High Court held that both the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) possess concurrent jurisdiction to issue reassessment notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, even after the insertion of Section 151A and the introduction of the E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022. The Court reiterated that its earlier ruling in TKS Builders continues to govern reassessment proceedings in Delhi, and the dismissal of an SLP in Deepanjan Roy does not operate as a declaration of law under Article 141. The writ petitions challenging the reassessment notices were therefore dismissed.

Background:

1. A batch of writ petitions was filed by Inder Dev Gupta, All India Kataria Educational Society, Sumanglam Sewa Avam Education Samiti, and others challenging the validity of reassessment notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Petitioners argued that after the insertion of Section 151A, reassessment can be initiated only by the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), and therefore the notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) were without authority.
3. Petitioners relied on judgments of the Bombay, Telangana, Punjab & Haryana, and Rajasthan High Courts, as well as the Supreme Court’s dismissal of an SLP in Deepanjan Roy, to claim that the scheme made FAO the exclusive authority.
4. The Revenue opposed this by relying on multiple Delhi High Court decisions, including TKS Builders, which upheld concurrent jurisdiction of JAO and FAO. They argued that dismissal of an SLP does not amount to affirmation of the High Court’s reasoning.

Court’s Observations:

1. The Court reaffirmed that TKS Builders remains binding in the Delhi jurisdiction and clearly holds that both JAO and FAO share concurrent jurisdiction to issue notices under Section 148.
2. The Supreme Court’s rejection of an SLP in Deepanjan Roy does not constitute a declaration of law under Article 141 and therefore does not override Delhi High Court’s settled position.
3. Multiple Delhi High Court rulings — PC Jeweller, Mala Petrochemicals & Polymers, Mehak Jagga, and Empire Fasteners — continue to uphold concurrent jurisdiction.
4. The Court found no reason to depart from its consistent view merely because SLPs against TKS Builders are pending.
5. Accordingly, the reassessment notices were held valid, and the petitions were dismissed.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

1. Section 147–151, Income Tax Act, 1961 — Reassessment framework.
2. Section 148, Income Tax Act — Notice for income escaping assessment.
3. Section 151A, Income Tax Act — Faceless reassessment scheme.
4. E-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022 — Procedure for faceless reassessment.
5. Article 226, Constitution of India — Writ jurisdiction of High Courts.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Kameswar Rao & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar

Date of Decision: 21 November 2025