Allowed¶23

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Chandigarh

Income Tax – Section 148 notice

Punjab & Haryana HC13 May 2025CWP/13565/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP Kasauli Resorts v. Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Central Circle 1, Chandigarh; CWP No.13565 of 2025; Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; decided 13.05.2025 by Deepak Sibal, J. (with Lapita Banerji, J.); Section 148 Income Tax Act, 1961; faceless assessment; notification dated 29.03.2022 Ministry of Finance; Jurisdictional Assessing Officer; notice quashed; relied on Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No.15745 of 2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No.21509 of 2023); petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer quashed, with liberty to the respondent to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. ¶23

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP Vs Deputy Commissioner of… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

( Sr. No. 118 ) CWP No.13565 of 2025 Date of decision: 13.05.2025

¶3

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP Kasauli Resorts

¶4

.....Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Central Circle 1, Chandigarh

¶7

.....Respondent

¶8

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

¶9

Present : Mr. Salil Kapoor, Advocate and Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶11

¶12

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. ( Oral )

¶13

(1) Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) issued to the petitioner by the respondent 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 not have been done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-3), issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment.

¶14

SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

¶15

CWP No.13565 of 2025

¶16

[2]

¶17

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

¶18

(i) CWP No.15745 of 2024 - Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024.

¶19

(ii) CWP No.21509 of 2023 - Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024.

¶20

(3) Learned counsel for the respondent 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

¶21

Benches of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s and Jasjit Singh’s cases (supra).

¶22

(4) In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s and Jasjit Singh’s cases (supra), the impugned notice dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondent to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶23

(5) The petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶24

(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE

¶25

13.05.2025 ( LAPITA BANERJI ) sunil yadav JUDGE

¶26

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

¶27

SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.14 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Chandigarh

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

M/S Srishti Enterprises Vs Panjab University, Chandigarh and Anr.

Dheer Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ms Rashi Impex Vs Advisor to the Administrator, Ut Chandigarh & Others

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Chandigarh

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Chandigarh

Glenview Resorts Kasauli LLP Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Chandigarh