Anup Jain Vs Union of India and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Anup Jain Vs Union of India and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), with liberty 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 03.04.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the consequential actions for AY 2020-2021 were validly issued, given the petitioner's contention that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC.

Court's answer

The issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), and learned counsel appearing for Union of India did not dispute the same.

Ratio / Principle

This Court proceeded on the footing that the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh allowed writ petitions on the same issue as raised in the present writ petition, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Key takeaways

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.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax – Notice under Section 148, Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 03.04.2024, with consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021 – Challenged on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction, the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 having vested exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC – Issue held covered by Co-ordinate Bench decisions of the same Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India (CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters, decided 29.07.2024), wherein similar writ petitions were allowed by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised – Counsel for Union of India did not dispute coverage – Writ petition disposed of in terms of the said decisions; pending applications, if any, also disposed of.

CWP-10432-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

178

CWP-10432-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-09.04.2025

Anup Jain

....Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India & ors.

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. Varun Bansal & Mr. Nitin Bhasin, Advocates for the petitioner

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr. V. Vedika Rao, Advocate for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 03.04.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and conseuqential actions, for AY 2020-2021.

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. 21509-2023 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

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.22 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-10432-2025

2

whole records of the case.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 03.04.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and conseuqential actions, for AY 2020-2021, 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 2025.04.22 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document