[2025:RJ-JP:36125-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4295/2023 Pinki Parwani D/o Ganesh Narayan Soni, Having Her Address At 46/43, Moti Path, Mansarover, Jaipur 302020 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur- 302005. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-1, Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur. 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi, Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka Advocate with Mr. Rohan Chatter Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak Advocate with Ms. Jaya P. Pathak Advocate & Mr. Palash Gupta Advocate. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Judgment 08/09/2025 1. Mr. Sandeep Pathak, who appears on advance copy, agrees with Mr. Siddharth Ranka that one of the grounds raised certainly is covered by a judgment of this Court. 2. Ground referred to is that the notice dated 25th July 2022 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 1 DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported) [2025:RJ-JP:36125-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-4295/2023] 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. 3. At the same time, Mr. Sandeep Pathak 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. 4. Mr. Siddharth Ranka states that in view of the above, for the present, petitioner will reserve her right to raise other grounds at an appropriate stage. 5. Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties, we quash and set aside notice dated 25th July 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act with liberty as prayed. 6. Petition disposed. 7. Consequently, all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed. 8. In case, if any re-assessment order is passed, the same will also stand quashed and set aside. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ SANJAY KUMAWAT-SEEMA/57 2 2025 SCCOnLine Raj 3386 3 [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)