Allowed

Ashok Kumar v. Income Tax Officer , Ward 2 (1)

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2024CWP/7833/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a Section 148 income tax notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer during the faceless regime without faceless assessment under Section 144B. Following the Coordinate Bench decision in Jatinder Singh Bhangu, the Court set aside the notice dated 22.03.2024 for want of jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Notice dated 22.03.2024 set aside; revenue free to proceed afresh under the Act, 1961.

Ashok Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer , Ward 2 (1) — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CWP-7833-2024 (O&M)

¶2

Page 1 of 3

¶3

109

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

CM-15788-CWP-2024 in/and CWP-7833-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.09.2024

ASHOK KU M AR

. . . . Petitione r

Vs.

INCOME TA X OFFICER AND 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. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for t he petitioner.

¶15

M r. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standin g Counsel with M r. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing C o unsel f or the respondents/Revenue.

¶16

¶17

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

¶18

CM-15788-CWP-2024

¶19

A pplication for preponement of d ate of hearing of the main cas e

¶20

is allowed. M ain case is taken on board for to d ay itself.

¶21

Main case

¶22

Learne d counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of th e petitio n er can be disposed of in ter m s of judgment passed by th e Coordi n ate Bench in CWP-15745-2024, titled as Jatinder Sing h Bhang u vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024. Learne d counse l submits that he does not press the other grounds in the presen t

¶23

petitio n .

¶24

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.09.26 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

CWP-7833-2024 (O&M)

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

Learne d counsel for the revenue submi t s that the writ petition preferre d by the p etitioner does not essentially r a ise the said grounds which wer e exami n ed by the Coordinate Bench.

¶28

Howe v er, we find that the petitioner w a s served a notice under Sectio n 148 o f the Income Tax Act, 1961, b y the Jurisdictional Assessin g Office r during the faceless regime.

¶29

In C W P-21509-2023 and other bun c h of petitions, we have als o concur r ed with the judgment passed b y the Coordinate Bench in CWP - 15745- 2 024 (supra) and held as under: -

¶30

“18. Keeping in view th e law laid down by the C oordinate Bench (supra), noti c es 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.

¶31

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. 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.”

¶32

In vie w thereof, the writ petition is allowed and notice date d 22.03. 2 024 is set aside. The observati o ns and order passed above shal l

¶33

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.09.26 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶34

CWP-7833-2024 (O&M)

¶35

Page 3 of 3

¶36

apply m utatis mutandis to the present c ase. However, the respondents - revenu e would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as lai d down u nder the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶37

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

¶38

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

¶39

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶40

September 26, 2024

¶41

Mohit goyal

¶42

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

¶43

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.09.26 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ashok Kumar v. Income Tax Officer , Ward 2 (1)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar v. Income Tax Officer , Ward 2 (1)

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

Sahil Goyal Vs Union of India and Others

M/S Om Prakash Krishan Lal Jagadhri Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Seema Bishnoi Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S Shree Sagar and Sons Hissar Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Harsh Infinity Flavour Private Limited Vs Union of India and Others

Commissioner of Wealth Tax,Lud Vs Adesh Kumar HUF