Prerna Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Faridabad and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Prerna Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Faridabad and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024); 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 was validly issued, given the contention that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC.

Court's answer

The issue raised in the writ petition is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), and learned counsel for the Union of India did not dispute the same; accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of those decisions.

Ratio / Principle

In line with the Co-ordinate Bench decisions being followed, the disposal carries the liberty granted therein to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (CWP-13930-2025 (O&M)) by Prerna challenging notice dated 29.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential actions for AY 2021-2022, on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction, the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 having vested exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC. Counsel for the petitioner submitted the issue was covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (decided 29.07.2024); counsel for the Union of India did not dispute this. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of those decisions, which had allowed similar petitions with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

CWP-13930-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

144

CWP-13930-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-15.05.2025

Prerna

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer Ward 2 (1), 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 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-13930-2025

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 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