Rani Mahajan Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Rani Mahajan Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax… — 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 (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed identical petitions while granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

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 all consequential actions) was validly issued, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 conferring exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices on the NFAC.

Court's answer

The present writ petition is 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); the challenge to the Section 148 notice is thus resolved on the same footing as those cases, in which identical petitions were allowed with liberty left to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (bench: Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma, J.) disposed of CWP-13871-2025 filed by Rani Mahajan challenging a notice dated 29.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022. The challenge rested on the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, stated to vest exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC, on which basis the petitioner contended the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction. Counsel for the Union of India did not dispute that the issue stood covered by Co-ordinate Bench rulings in 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), which had allowed identical writ petitions granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961, if so advised. The petition was disposed of in terms of those judgments, and all pending applications were likewise disposed of.

CWP-13871-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

138 CWP-13871-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-15.05.2025

Rani Mahajan

....Petitioner

Vs.

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar I & anr.

...Respondents

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

Present: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Ms. Vidhi Malhotra and Mr. Vardaan Malhotra, Advocates, for the petitioner.

Mrs. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondents.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

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.

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 29.03.2025 issued

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-13871-2025

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 enumera ted 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 15.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

15.05.2025 Gaurav Arora

Gaurav Arora 2025.05.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document