Disposed¶25

Kiran Virmani v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC26 May 2025CWP/13697/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 148 notice; Income Tax Act 1961; AY 2021-2022; jurisdictional challenge to issuing authority; NFAC exclusive power; CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022; writ disposed of following Co-ordinate Bench rulings in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 215092023, 29.07.2024); liberty to revenue to proceed under the Act if so advised; Kiran Virmani v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (4), Faridabad; High Court of Punjab and Haryana; CWP-13697-2025 (O&M); decided 26.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

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); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ¶25

Kiran Virmani Vs Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 28.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2021-2022 was validly issued, given that per the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 the NFAC alone has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices, and the Issuing Authority therefore allegedly lacked jurisdiction.

¶23

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed identical petitions on the same Section 148/NFAC-jurisdiction issue, granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court, CWP-13697-2025 (O&M), decided 26.05.2025 (Sudeepti Sharma, J.; bench with Lisa Gill, J.). Kiran Virmani challenged a notice dated 28.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential actions for AY 2021-2022, contending that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction because, per a CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices. Counsel for the Union of India did not dispute that the issue stood covered. Holding: the petition was disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 215092023 and other connected matters, decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed like petitions and granted the revenue liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All pending applications, if any, were also disposed of.

¶1

CWP-13697-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

166 CWP-13697-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-26.05.2025

Kiran Virmani

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (4), Faridabad & ors.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

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

¶11

Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate Ms Mamta Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

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

¶13

¶14

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶15

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.

¶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 28.03.2025 issued

¶20

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.28 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-13697-2025

¶22

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

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

¶27

(LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 26.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶28

26.05.2025 Gaurav Arora

¶29

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.28 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Kiran Virmani v. Income Tax Officer and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Virmani v. Income Tax Officer 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

Open Door Welfare Society Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Anmol Rakheja Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

Pankaj Kumar and Anr. Vs State Bank of India and Anr.

Gurnam Singh Vs Additional Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana and Ors.

Rita Rakheja Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

Chakshu Saggar Vs Income Tax Officer and Others