M/S K L Jagdish Chander Jain Vs Income Tax Officer and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

M/S K L Jagdish Chander Jain Vs Income Tax Officer and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (29.07.2024), carrying the liberty therein granted to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 31.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2021-2022, and all consequential actions, are vitiated for want of jurisdiction of the Issuing Authority, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC.

Court's answer

The issue raised in the writ petition is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which allowed writ petitions on the same issue; learned counsel for the Union of India did not dispute this.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), in which liberty was granted to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax - Validity of notice under Section 148, Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2021-2022 - Petitioner challenged notice dated 31.03.2025 and all consequential actions on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction, in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 specifically enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148 - Held, the issue is covered by Co-ordinate Bench decisions of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), wherein writ petitions on the same issue were allowed with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961; learned counsel for the Union of India did not dispute the coverage - Writ petition disposed of in terms of those decisions; pending applications also disposed of.

CWP-10393-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

167

CWP-10393-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-09.04.2025

M/S K L JAGDISH CHANDER JAIN

....Petitioner

Vs.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3 (1), LUDHIANA & OTHERS

..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate Ms. Uma Bharti, Advocate, for the petitioner

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 31.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others , passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 215092023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024 .

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case.

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.10 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-10393-2025

2

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 31.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022 on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, in view of the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024

All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 09.04.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.10 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document