Harvinder Kaur Vs Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Harvinder Kaur Vs Income Tax Officer 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 (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned notices/orders (Sections 148, 147, 156, 272A(1)(d) and 270A, Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2020-2021) were issued without 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. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court proceeded on the footing that the issue raised was the same as that decided by the Co-ordinate Bench, which had allowed such writ petitions while granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Sudeepti Sharma, J.; bench with Arun Palli, J.) disposes of CWP-10596-2025 filed by Harvinder Kaur challenging, for AY 2020-2021, notice dated 22.03.2024 under Section 148, order dated 11.02.2025 under Section 147, demand notice dated 11.02.2025 under Section 156, notice dated 10.02.2025 under Section 272A(1)(d) and notice dated 11.02.2025 under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 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 vesting exclusive power in the NFAC to issue Section 148 notices. Holding: the issue 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. 215092023, decided 29.07.2024), which allowed similar writ petitions granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961; the Union of India did not dispute the coverage. Petition disposed of in terms of those decisions; pending applications disposed of.

CWP-10596-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

201

CWP-10596-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-09.04.2025

Harvinder Kaur

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 Ambala Cantt & ors.

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. Nikhil Goyal and Mr. Yash Gilhotra, Advocates, for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 22.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); order dated 11.02.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 11.02.2025 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; notice dated 10.02.2025 issued under Section 272 A (1) (d) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 11.02.2025 issued under Section 270 A of the Act, 1961 and all consequential 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. 215092023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024 .

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not

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

CWP-10596-2025

2

disputed the same.

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

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 22.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 11.02.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 11.02.2025 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; notice dated 10.02.2025 issued under Section 272 A (1) (d) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 11.02.2025 issued under Section 270 A of the Act, 1961 and all consequential 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 PAL	LI) (SU	DEEPTI 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