Allowed

Nisha Wines v. Union of India

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Aug 2024CWP/20820/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition challenging reassessment notices issued without faceless assessment procedure was allowed by applying mutatis mutandis the court's earlier ruling in Jasjit Singh; notices under Sections 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148 with consequential proceedings were set aside for want of jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Notice u/s 148A(b) dated 20.02.2024, order u/s 148A(d) dated 04.03.2024 and notice u/s 148 dated 04.03.2024 and consequential proceedings set aside.

Nisha Wines Vs Union of India — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

(O&M)

Page 1 of 3

133

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

(O&M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2024

¶6

. . . . Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

UNION OF INDIAAND OTHERS

¶9

. . . . Respondents

¶10

****

¶11

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

Present:

****

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

¶16

Notice of motion.

¶17

accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶18

Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others , decided on 29.07.2024, wherein this Court held as under:

¶19

LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶20

(O&M)

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

“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 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

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.”

¶27

LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶28

(O&M)

¶29

Page 3 of 3

¶30

Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice dated 20.02.2024 under Section 148A(b), order dated 04.03.2024 under Section 148A(d) and notice u/s 148 dated 04.03.2024 and consequential proceedings are set aside.

¶31

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

¶33

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶34

August 27, 2024 Lavisha

¶35

1. Whether speaking/reasoned?

¶36

2. Whether reportable?

¶37

Yes/No Yes/No

¶38

LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

Nisha Wines v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nisha Wines v. Union of India

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Amar Karyana Co. Vs State of Hy.

Jaswinder Pal Singh through Legal Heir Gurjit Kaur Vs Union of India and Others

Malkiat Singh Vs State of Punjab and Otthers

Shelly Chhabra Vs Income Tax Officer

Sood Enterprises, through Its Proprietor Sahil Sood Vs Union of India through Its Secretary and Others

Shree Ganesh Traders Vs Union of India and Others