Disposed¶24

Furman Singh Sandhu v. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1) Ferozepur and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC28 May 2025CWP/15902/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab and Haryana High Court; CWP-15902-2025 (O&M); Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961 notice dated 21.02.2023; AY 2019-2020; jurisdiction of Issuing Authority; NFAC exclusive power; CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022; disposal in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (29.07.2024); liberty to revenue to proceed under the Act; petitioner Furman Singh Sandhu; advocates Kartik Bansal and Urvashi Dhugga (Sr. Standing counsel).

What did the court decide?

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. ¶24

Furman Singh Sandhu Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1)… — 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.

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 21.02.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2019-2020 was invalidly issued for want of jurisdiction, in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC.

¶22

Court's answer

The present 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 allowed writ petitions on the same jurisdictional issue concerning the Section 148 notice.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

In disposing of the petition in terms of the said precedents, the relief granted therein applies: the revenue has liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP-15902-2025 (O&M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 28.05.2025; coram Justices Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma, judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma, J. Furman Singh Sandhu challenged a notice dated 21.02.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential actions for AY 2019-2020, contending that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, which vests exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC. Relying on Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 215092023 as printed, decided 29.07.2024), which allowed writ petitions on the same issue, and with counsel for Union of India not disputing the coverage, the petition was disposed of in terms of those decisions, with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; pending applications were disposed of.

¶1

CWP-15902-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

222 CWP-15902-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-28.05.2025

Furman Singh Sandhu

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 3 (1), Ferozepur & ors. ...Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present: Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶14

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 21.02.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’) and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020.

¶15

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.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same.

¶17

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case.

¶18

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 21.02.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY

¶19

Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-15902-2025

¶21

¶22

2019-2020 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.

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

(LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 28.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶27

28.05.2025 Gaurav Arora

¶28

Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Furman Singh Sandhu v. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1) Ferozepur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Furman Singh Sandhu v. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1) Ferozepur 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Amar Dhanju Rice Mills Vs Pb. St. Coop. Supply and Marketing Fed. Ltd. and Ors.

M/S Airplaza Retail Holding Pvt. Ltd. Vs B R Darshan and Ors.

Geetika Wadhwa Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes and Ors.

M/S Qral India Private Limited Vs the Commissioner (Appeals)

Panasonic Life Solutions India Private Limited Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mitsuba India Private Limited Vs Union of India and Ors.