[2025:RJ-JP:37968-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7348/2025 M/s Gem Exports, 103, Ridhi Sidhi Building Ahanisa Circle, C- Scheme, Jaipur (Raj.) 302001. Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Brijesh Ghiya S/o Late Sh. B.D. Ghiya. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, New Delhi. 2. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, NCRB, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 3. The Principal Commissioner, Income Tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur-1, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 4. National Faceless Assessment Centre (Nafac), New Delhi 11001 Through Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Paridhi Jain with Mr. Mayank Vyas & Mr. Nikhil Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitin Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 17/09/2025 1. Considering that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act has been issued on 29.03.2024 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21, after the faceless regime had come into force, we follow our judgments passed in the cases of Sharda Devi Chhajer v. The Income Tax Officer & Anr. [(2025) SCCOnLine Raj 3386], Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of [2025:RJ-JP:37968-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-7348/2025] Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(2) [(2024) 162 Taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)] and Arvind Shah v. DGIT (Inv.) Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14182/2024). 2. In Arvind Shah’s case (supra), this Court has held as under:- “2. One of us (Mr. Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.), while sitting at Punjab and Haryana High Court passed an order in CWP No.21509/2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India & Ors., decided on 29.07.2024 wherein, it was held as under:- “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there isno occasion to distinguish or take a different view as sug-gested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench (supra) notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 19. The respondents-revenue would be, however at liberty to follow the [2025:RJ-JP:37968-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-7348/2025] procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” 3. Keeping in view the above, the present writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. 4. The notice dated 21.03.2024 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and all the consequential orders passed therein on the said basis stand quashed and set aside. 5. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed.” 3. Keeping in view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. 4. Therefore, keeping open all the rights and contentions of parties, the notice dated 29.03.2024 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and all the consequential orders passed therein on the said basis, stand quashed and set aside. 5. Petition disposed. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J SAHIL SONI /88