Faridabad Steel Mongers Private Limited Vs Assistant… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Faridabad Steel Mongers Private Limited Vs Assistant… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided on 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided on 29.07.2024), with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 31.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2018-2019 was 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 (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), which allowed identical writ petitions challenging Section 148 notices on the ground of want of jurisdiction of the Issuing Authority; accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of those judgments, with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Ratio / Principle

All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax - Notice under S.148 - Jurisdiction of issuing authority - Petitioner (Faridabad Steel Mongers Pvt. Ltd.) challenged notice dated 31.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential actions, for AY 2018-2019, contending that per the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices, hence the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction. Held, the issue is covered by Co-ordinate Bench decisions 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. 215092023, decided 29.07.2024); Union of India did not dispute coverage. Writ petition disposed of in terms of the said judgments, with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; pending applications disposed of. Coram: Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma, J. Decided 21.05.2025.

CWP-11469-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

165 CWP-11469-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-21.05.2025

Faridabad Steel Mongers Pvt. Ltd.

....Petitioner

Vs.

Asstt. Commissioner Income Tax, Circle 1, Faridabad & ors.

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing counsel for the respondents.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 31.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and all consequential actions, for AY 2018-2019.

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.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 31.08.2024 issued

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.26 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-11469-2025

2

under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2018-2019 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.

(LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 21.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

21.05.2025 Gaurav Arora

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.26 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document