Allowed

Sandeep v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC29 Aug 2024CWP/21262/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings. Relying on Jasjit Singh (CWP-21509-2023), the court held notices under Section 148 issued without the Section 144B faceless procedure were without jurisdiction and set aside the Section 148A(d) order dated 05.04.2024 and the Section 148 notice.

What did the court decide?

Order u/s 148A(d) dated 05.04.2024 and notice u/s 148 dated 05.04.2024 with consequential proceedings set aside; pending applications disposed of.

Sandeep Vs Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CWP-21262-2024 (O&M)

(THROUGH VC)

Page 1 of 3

145

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶6

CWP-21262-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.08.2024

¶7

SANDEEP

¶8

. . . . Petitione r Vs.

¶9

INCOME T A X OFFICER AND OTHERS

¶10

. . . . Respondent s

¶11

****

¶12

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

¶13

¶14

Present: M r. B.M. Monga, Advocate wit h M r. Rohit Kaura, Advocate f or the petitioner.

¶15

M s. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing Counsel f or the respondents.

¶16

¶17

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

¶18

Notice of motion.

¶19

Ms. G a uri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Sta n ding Counsel accepts notice o n behalf o f respondents/Revenue.

¶20

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

¶21

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.29 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶22

CWP-21262-2024 (O&M)

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

“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 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

¶25

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 beesn 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.

¶26

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.

¶27

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.29 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶28

CWP-21262-2024 (O&M)

¶29

Page 3 of 3

¶30

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.”

¶31

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 mutan d is to the present case. Accor d ingly, order u/s 148A(d) date d 05.04. 2 024, notice u/s 148 dated 05.04.2024 and consequentia l procee d ings are set aside.

¶32

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

¶33

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

¶34

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶35

August 29, 2024

¶36

Mohit goyal

¶37

1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶38

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.29 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sandeep v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep v. Income Tax Officer and Others

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

Maharaja Aggarsain Udyog Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

M/S Simran Medical Agencies Vs Ut of Chandigarh

The Controller of Estate Duty Vs Ujjagar Singh

Surender Singh Deswal Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Kaithal Solvent Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

Sant Deepak Educational and Charitable Trust Vs Income Tax Officer (Exemptions Ward) and Others