Allowed

Pridhi Apparels LLP v. Pr Commissioner of Income Tax and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Aug 2024CWP/11502/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench held that notices under Section 148 and consequent proceedings initiated without conducting a faceless assessment under Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are contrary to law and set them aside following Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India.

What did the court decide?

Notices u/s 148 dated 30.03.2024 and all consequential proceedings set aside; pending applications disposed.

Pridhi Apparels LLP Vs Pr Commissioner of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CWP-11502-2024 (O&M)

¶2

CWP-11502-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.08.2024

¶3

Page 1 of 3

¶4

246-27

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶6

PRIDHI APP A RELS LLP

¶7

. . . . Petitione r

¶8

Vs.

¶9

PR. COMMI S SIONER OF INCOME TAX A ND ANOTHER

¶10

. . . . Respondent s

¶11

****

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

¶13

¶14

Present: M r. Vivek Bansal, Advocate M r. Vishal Chechi, Advocate M r. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate f or the petitioner.

¶15

M r. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing C o unsel f or the respondents/Revenue.

¶16

¶17

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

¶18

Both t h e counsel are ad idem that th e issue involved in the presen t petitio n stands finally adjudicated in v iew of the judgment passed b y this C o urt in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union

¶19

of India and others , decided on 29.07. 2 024, wherein this Court held a s

¶20

under:

¶21

“16. We are in agreeme n t with the view taken b y the Coordinate Bench and ho l d that such circular or instructions by the Board could n ot have been issued to o verride statutory provisions or t o make them otiose or o bsolete. Legislative enactment s having financial be f ollowed strictly and mandato r ily. By exercising the

¶22

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶23

CWP-11502-2024 (O&M)

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

p owers contained Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1 961 as well as Section 144B ( 7 & 8), the authorities c annot be allowed to usurp the l e gal provisions to their o wn satisfaction and convenien c e causing hardship to t he assessees. It also leaves co nf usion in the minds of t he taxpayers instructions and supplementing the s tatutory provisions and

¶26

17. In view of the afores a id discussion, there is n o occasion to distinguish or t a ke a different view as s uggested by the learned couns e l for the revenue from w hat has already been held by t h e Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the C oordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO u nder Section 148 of the Act, 19 6 1 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without co n ducting the faceless a ssessment as envisaged unde r Section 144B of the A ct, 1961, have been found t o be contrary to the p rovisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices d ated 28.02.2023, 16.03.20 2 3, 20.03.2024 and 3 0.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside f or want of jurisdiction.

¶27

19. The respondents-reve n ue would be, however, a t liberty to follow the procedu r e as laid down under t he Act, 1961 and proceed accor d ingly, if so advised.

¶28

20. All the writ petitio n s are allowed. The interim order passed by the Co u rt shall stand merged w ith the present order.”

¶29

Keepi n g in view above, we allow thi s Writ Petition in the aforesai d terms. The observations and order p a ssed above shall apply mutati s

¶30

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶31

CWP-11502-2024 (O&M)

¶32

Page 3 of 3

¶33

mutan d is to the present case. Acc o rdingly, notice u/s 148 date d

¶34

30.03. 2 024 and all consequential proceedings are set aside.

¶35

All pe n ding applications also stand dis p osed of accordingly.

¶36

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

¶37

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶38

August 13, 2024

¶39

Mohit goyal

¶40

1. Whether speaking/reasoned?

¶41

2. Whether reportable?

¶42

Yes/No

¶43

Yes/No

¶44

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Pridhi Apparels LLP v. Pr Commissioner of Income Tax and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pridhi Apparels LLP v. Pr Commissioner of Income Tax and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Vs Union of India

M/S Shivani Woollen Mills, Panipat Vs Union of India and Others

The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Faridabad Vs Willis Towers Waston India Private Limited

S.V. Gupta HUF Vs Pr Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad and Another

Pridhi Apparels LLP Vs Pr Commissioner of Income Tax and Another

Mk Protiens Limited Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Ambala