Writ petition challenging an income tax reassessment notice; following this Court's earlier judgment in Jasjit Singh, the petition was allowed and the Section 148 notice dated 31.03.2024 with consequential proceedings were set aside.
Notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2024 and consequential proceedings set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(O&M)
Page 1 of 3
119
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(O&M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2024
. . . . Petitioner
Vs.
INCOME TAX OFFICER
. . . . Respondent
****
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)
of respondent.
“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
LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
(O&M)
Page 2 of 3
override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained 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 instructions and supplementing the statutory provisions and
17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested 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 Coordinate 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 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.”
terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis
LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
(O&M)
Page 3 of 3
mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 dated
31.03.2024 and consequential proceedings are set aside.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE
August 27, 2024 Lavisha
1. Whether speaking/reasoned?
2. Whether reportable?
Yes/No Yes/No
LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a notice under Section 148 issued without the faceless assessment procedure mandated by Section 144B can be sustained.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and othersFollowed¶3
CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Income Tax Officer
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Sanjay Vashisth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
