Allowed¶21

Harpreet Singh Shahi v. Union of India

Punjab & Haryana HC6 May 2025CWP/12814/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961 notice quashed; faceless assessment; notification dated 29.03.2022 Ministry of Finance; Jurisdictional Assessing Officer; reliance on Jatinder Singh Bhangu CWP-15745-2024 (19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh CWP-21509-2023 (29.07.2024); Punjab & Haryana High Court; CWP-12814-2025; Harpreet Singh Shahi vs Union of India; writ petition allowed 06.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned notice dated 30.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. ¶21

Harpreet Singh Shahi Vs Union of India — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned notice dated 30.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer was validly issued, given that in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, such notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment.

¶11

Court's answer

In terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP-15745-2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP-21509-2023), the impugned notice dated 30.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of by way of faceless assessment as required by the notification dated 29.03.2022, is quashed, with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court, CWP-12814-2025 (decided 06.05.2025; Deepak Sibal and Lapita Banerji, JJ.) - Harpreet Singh Shahi challenged a notice dated 30.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued to him by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, contending that in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, such notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. Counsel for the petitioner relied on two coordinate-Bench judgments of this Court - Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP-15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP-21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024); counsel for the respondents did not dispute that the petitioner's case was covered by the law laid down therein. Acting in terms of the law laid down in those two cases, the Court quashed the impugned notice with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law, and allowed the petition.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Sr. No.122 CWP-12814-2025

¶3

Date of decision : 06.05.2025

¶4

Harpreet Singh Shahi .…. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Union of India and another ..... Respondents

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

¶8

Present : Mr.Mukesh Pandey, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr.Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department. * * * * *

¶10

DEEPAK SIBAL, J . (Oral)

¶11

Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 30.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued to the petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer which could have not been done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment.

¶12

In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:-

¶13

(i) CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others , decided on 19.07.2024; and

¶14

(ii) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others , decided on 29.07.2024.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co-ordinate Benches of this Court

¶16

SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.05.09 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

¶17

CWP-12814-2025

¶18

[ 2 ]

¶19

in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra).

¶20

In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra), the impugned notice dated 30.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶21

The petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶22

[DEEPAK SIBAL] JUDGE

¶23

06.05.2025 [LAPITA BANERJI] shamsher JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No

¶24

SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.05.09 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

Harpreet Singh Shahi v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harpreet Singh Shahi v. Union of India

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

Vedpal Vs State of Haryana and Others

Vishal Vicky Daku Vinay Vs the State of Haryana and Others

Dr Dwarka Dass Khurana and Other Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ranjit Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Maghar Singh and Ors. Vs Addl. Director Consolidation Pb. and Ors.

Satpal and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others