Disposed¶7

Rajender Kumar Swami v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Faridabad and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2025CWP/11972/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 148 notice; jurisdiction of Issuing Authority; NFAC exclusive power; CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022; AY 2021-2022; Income Tax Act 1961; disposal in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, dt. 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (dt. 29.07.2024); ITO Ward 2(1) Faridabad; Punjab and Haryana High Court; revenue liberty to proceed under the Act if so advised.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (decided on 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh's case (decided on 29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ¶7

Rajender Kumar Swami Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (decided on 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh's case (decided on 29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 29.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2021-2022, and consequential actions, were invalidly issued because the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting the NFAC with exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices.

¶22

Court's answer

The present writ petition, challenging the Section 148 notice on the ground of want of jurisdiction of the Issuing Authority in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024); accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of those decisions.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

As per the terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in which this writ petition is disposed of, the revenue is granted liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Chandigarh), CWP-11972-2025 (O&M), decided 27.05.2025 (Sudeepti Sharma, J.; bench incl. Lisa Gill, J.). Rajender Kumar Swami challenged the notice dated 29.03.2025 issued under Section 148, Income Tax Act 1961, and all consequential actions for AY 2021-2022, contending that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, which vests the NFAC with exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices. Counsel appearing for Union of India did not dispute that the grievance is covered by Co-ordinate Bench decisions of the same Court — Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India (decided 29.07.2024) — in which writ petitions on the same issue were allowed with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. The present writ petition was disposed of in terms of those two decisions, with all pending applications, if any, likewise disposed of.

¶1

CWP-11972-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

159 CWP-11972-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-27.05.2025

Rajender Kumar Swami

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), Faridabad & ors. ...Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶14

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 29.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’) and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 29.03.2025 issued

¶19

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.29 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-11972-2025

¶21

¶22

under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022 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 27.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶27

27.05.2025 Gaurav Arora

¶28

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.29 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rajender Kumar Swami v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Faridabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajender Kumar Swami v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Faridabad 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

Gurnam Singh Vs Additional Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana and Ors.

Kiran Virmani Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

Rita Rakheja Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

M/S Amar Dhanju Rice Mills Vs Pb. St. Coop. Supply and Marketing Fed. Ltd. and Ors.

M/S Airplaza Retail Holding Pvt. Ltd. Vs B R Darshan and Ors.

Geetika Wadhwa Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes and Ors.