Allowed¶23

Ajit Singh v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC23 May 2025CWP/15147/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP-15147-2025; High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; decided 23.05.2025; Deepak Sibal, J. (author) and Lapita Banerji, J.; petitioner Ajit Singh vs Union of India and others; Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961 notice dated 29.03.2025 by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer challenged as contrary to faceless-assessment notification dated 29.03.2022; relied on Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP-15745-2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP-21509-2023); notice quashed with liberty to proceed afresh; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) quashed; respondents granted liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. ¶23

Ajit Singh Vs Union of India and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Sr. No.132

¶3

CWP-15147-2025 Date of decision: 23.05.2025

Ajit Singh

....Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present: Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶12

* * *

¶13

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

¶14

Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) issued to the petitioner by the respondents 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 have not 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.

¶15

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

¶16

(i) CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others , decided on 19.07.2024; and

¶17

(ii) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others , decided on 29.07.2024.

¶18

JYOTI SHARMA 2025.05.26 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

¶19

CWP-15147-2025

¶20

-2-

¶21

Learned counsel for the respondents 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 Benches of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( supra ).

¶22

In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( supra ), the impugned notice dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶23

The petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶24

(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE

¶25

(LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE

¶26

May 23, 2025 Jyoti 1

¶27

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

¶28

JYOTI SHARMA 2025.05.26 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Ajit Singh v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Singh v. Union of India 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

Gurdawar Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Anuja Singhal and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Lichha Ram and Others Vs State of Haryana & Others

M/S Rabditta Corporates Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.

M/S Pristine Hospitality Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.

M/S the Timeliners Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.