Vipul Bhutani Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Vipul Bhutani Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed identical writ petitions granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; all pending applications also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 28.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2021-2022 (and all consequential actions) suffers from jurisdictional infirmity because, per the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, the NFAC alone has exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148.

Court's answer

The issue raised in the writ petition is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), and the contention has not been disputed by learned counsel for the Union of India.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the said Co-ordinate Bench decisions (Jatinder Singh Bhangu, decided 19.07.2024, and Jasjit Singh, decided 29.07.2024), and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax - Section 148 notice - issuing authority/jurisdiction - CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power in NFAC to issue Section 148 notices - petitioner challenged notice dated 28.03.2025 for AY 2021-2022 and all consequential actions on the ground that the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction - issue found covered by Co-ordinate Bench decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh v. Union of India (printed as CWP No. 215092023, i.e. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed identical petitions granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961 - contention undisputed by counsel for Union of India - petition disposed of in terms of those decisions; pending applications likewise disposed.

CWP-12828-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

185 CWP-12828-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-06.05.2025

Vipul Bhutani

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (3), 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 28.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022.

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 28.03.2025 issued

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.12 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-12828-2025

2

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.

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 06.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

06.05.2025 Gaurav Arora

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.12 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document