Disposed¶7

Sandeep Gupta v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Jul 2025CWP/20052/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961; Section 148A(1); Section 148A(3); NFAC exclusive jurisdiction; CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022; AY 2021-2022; Jatinder Singh Bhangu CWP 15745-2024; Jasjit Singh CWP 21509-2023; jurisdiction of issuing authority; Punjab and Haryana High Court; CWP-20052-2025 (O&M); disposed of in terms of coordinate bench decisions.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh's case (decided 29.07.2024), i.e., with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ¶7

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice under Section 148, the order under Section 148A(3) dated 27.06.2025 and the notice under Section 148A(1) dated 22.03.2025 under the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2021-2022, are without jurisdiction because they were not issued by the NFAC, in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power in the NFAC.

¶5

Court's answer

The issue raised in the present writ petition is the same as the issue on which a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court allowed the writ petitions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case and Jasjit Singh's case, and learned counsel for the Union of India did not dispute the coverage.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

In view of the coverage by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh's case (decided 29.07.2024), and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Division Bench, Sudeepti Sharma, J.) disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice dated 27.06.2025 under Section 148, an order dated 27.06.2025 under Section 148A(3) and a notice dated 22.03.2025 under Section 148A(1) 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 in the NFAC to issue notices under Section 148. Holding the issue covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which the Revenue did not dispute, the Court disposed of the petition in terms of those decisions, with liberty to the Revenue to proceed under the Act, 1961 if so advised.

¶1

CWP-20052-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

122-A

¶5

CWP-20052-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-18.07.2025

Sandeep Gupta

....Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India &ors.

...Respondents

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

¶12

Present: Mr. Satyam Aneja, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr. Akshay Mittal, Jr. Standing counsel for the respondents.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 27.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); order dated 27.06.2025 issued under Section 148 A (3) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 22.03.2025 issued under Section 148 A(1) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022.

¶17

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 .

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.28 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-20052-2025

¶22

¶23

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 27.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 27.06.2025 issued under Section 148 A (3) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 22.03.2025 issued under Section 148 A(1) 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 18.07.2025 Gaurav Arora

¶28

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

¶29

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.28 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sandeep Gupta v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Gupta 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

Ravinder Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S Kundan Care Products Limited Vs Union of India and Others

Maj Gen Ms Chandhoke Retd Vs Union of India and Ors.

Harvinder Singh Vs State of Punjab through the Additional Chief Secretary Cum Financial Commissioner and Others

Rashi Khanna and Others Vs Union of India and Others

M/S Bhagya Foods and Wines Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana and Others