In Faceless assessment scheme, High Court can assume jurisdiction based on the place of residence of the assessee mentioned in the PAN details

 

Allahadbad High court in the case of Ziyauddin Traders v. National Faceless Assessment Centre [2024] 162 Taxmann 708 has held High Court can assume jurisdiction based on the place of residence of the assessee mentioned in the PAN details in the faceless assessment scheme.

Let us have a short overview of the case:

1.Assessee filed their tax return for A.Y. 2022-23 online, listing their present address as Dholpur, Rajasthan.

2.Revenue made certain additions. Assessee filed instant writ petition for challenging same. Revenue objected to petition being entertained by High Court in U.P. on grounds that return was filed from outside state and assessment order was issued by Faceless Assessment Center.

3.Question to be answered is whether in faceless assessment, concept of geographical location of assessing authority has been rendered largely irrelevant for purpose of determining territorial jurisdiction of High Court to which such assessing authority may abide.

Conclusions:

1. The petitioner have filed its return for A.Y. 2022-23 through online mode, disclosing his present address at Dholpur, Rajasthan.

2.In view of the above fact, first preliminary objection raised by the revenue that the present petition may not be entertained by this Court as the assessee filed its return from outside the State of U.P. and the assessment order has been passed by the Faceless Assessment Center, is misconceived.

3.To determine the issue of territorial jurisdiction, residence of an assessee in PAN registration details may remain vital and decisive.

4.It was noted that vital part of cause of action arose in U.P., as assessee’s PAN registration remained in Aligarh, U.P. In the view of above fact, High Court in U.P. had territorial jurisdiction over matter, and objection raised by revenue was to be rejected