Abhishek Anand v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC6 May 2025CWP/11486/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961 notice; NFAC exclusive jurisdiction; CBDT circular/notification 29.03.2022; Issuing Authority jurisdiction; AY 2019-2020; assessment order 29.03.2025; penalty notice 30.03.2025; Jatinder Singh Bhangu CWP 15745-2024 19.07.2024; Jasjit Singh 29.07.2024; disposed in terms of Co-ordinate Bench decisions; liberty to revenue to follow procedure; Punjab & Haryana High Court CWP (O&M); Lisa Gill; Sudeepti Sharma.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ¶¶24

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

¶1

CWP-11486-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

148 CWP-11486-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-06.05.2025

Abhishek Anand

....Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India & ors.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

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

¶11

Present: Ms. Aakriti and Mr. Ishan Loomba, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

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

¶13

¶14

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶15

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 31.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); order dated 29.03.2025; penalty notice dated 30.03.2025 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 31.03.2024 issued Gaurav Arora 2025.05.12 14:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-11486-2025

¶21

¶22

under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 29.03.2025; penalty notice dated 30.03.2025 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020 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.

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

(LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE

¶27

06.05.2025

¶28

Gaurav Arora

¶29

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶30

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.12 14:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Abhishek Anand v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Anand v. Union of India 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

Similar cases

Haryana Urban Development Authority Now Known as Haryana Shahri Vikas Pradhikaran Vs State of Haryana

Commissioner of Income Tax I Vs M/S Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd.

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana Vs M/S Narula Foods Pvt. Ltd.

Shalinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Big Daddy and Company Vs Union of India I and Ors.

Sandeep Arora Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 Faridabad and Others