Disposed¶26

Sumit Kumar Bhatia v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Apr 2025CWP/10858/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 148 notice 22.03.2024; Section 147 assessment order 22.03.2025; demand notice and penalty SCN 29.03.2025; AY 2020-2021; CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022; NFAC exclusive jurisdiction; Income Tax Act 1961; appeal pending before Appellate Authority; disposal in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 215092023, 29.07.2024); Punjab and Haryana High Court; CWP-10858-2025 (O&M); decided 22.04.2025; Sudeepti Sharma J.; Lisa Gill J.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the petitioner's appeal in terms of the co-ordinate Bench judgments (Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh); all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ¶26

Sumit Kumar Bhatia Vs Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Validity of the notice dated 22.03.2024 under Section 148, the assessment order dated 22.03.2025 under Section 147, and the demand and penalty notices dated 29.03.2025 for AY 2020-2021, challenged in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting NFAC with exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices; whether the issue is covered by co-ordinate Bench decisions. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

This Court accepted that the issue raised in the petition is covered by the co-ordinate Bench judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh, which allowed such writ petitions on the same issue, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

As the petitioner's appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition was disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh.

¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (CWP-10858-2025 (O&M), decided 22.04.2025; coram Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma JJ.; judgment by Sudeepti Sharma, J.) disposed of a writ petition by Sumit Kumar Bhatia challenging the notice dated 22.03.2024 under S. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessment order dated 22.03.2025 under S. 147, demand notice and penalty show cause notice dated 29.03.2025 and consequential actions for AY 2020-2021. The challenge rested on the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 according NFAC exclusive power to issue S. 148 notices. Holding the issue covered by 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 had allowed identical writ petitions with liberty to the revenue to follow the statutory procedure, and since the petitioner's appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority (a fact not disputed by the Union of India), the Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal in terms of those judgments; pending applications stood disposed.

¶1

CWP-10858-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

152 CWP-10858-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-22.04.2025

Sumit Kumar Bhatia

....Petitioner

Vs.

INCOME TAX OFFICER, Ward 7 (1), LUDHIANA & ORS.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶11

Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate

¶12

Ms. Mamta Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

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

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

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”) impugned assessment order dated 22.03.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice and penalty show cause notice dated 29.03.2025 and all consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the above 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 for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not

¶19

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.01 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-10858-2025

disputed the same.

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

¶24

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 22.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; impugned assessment order dated 22.03.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice and penalty show cause notice dated 29.03.2025 and all consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021, 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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Since in the present case, the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner, in terms of the judgments mentioned above.

¶27

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

¶28

(LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 22.04.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶29

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.01 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sumit Kumar Bhatia v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Kumar Bhatia v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Teja Singh Vs Financial Commissioner (APPEALS-1) & Ors.

Vijay Kumar Tandon Vs Union of India and Others

Smart Homes Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4) Faridabad and Others

Vandana Jain Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre and Ors.

Vandana Jain Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre,Delhi and Others

M/S Hvr Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs Union of India and Others