Disposed¶7

Jai Lal v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Jul 2025CWP/20079/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 148 notice; Section 148A(3) order; jurisdiction of Issuing Authority; NFAC exclusive power; CBDT circular/notification 29.03.2022; AY 2019-2020; Jatinder Singh Bhangu CWP No. 15745-2024; Jasjit Singh CWP No. 21509-2023; disposal in terms of Co-ordinate Bench judgments; Punjab and Haryana High Court; decision date 18.07.2025.

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), which had allowed such writ petitions on the same issue granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; pending applications, if any, disposed of. ¶7

Jai Lal 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 Issuing Authority had jurisdiction to issue the notice dated 30.06.2025 under Section 148 and the order dated 30.06.2025 under Section 148A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

Since counsel for the petitioner contended and counsel for the Union of India did not dispute that the issue is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of those judgments; all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP-20079-2025 (O&M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 18.07.2025 (bench: Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma, J.). Petitioner Jai Lal challenged notice dated 30.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and order dated 30.06.2025 issued under Section 148A(3), with all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020, on the ground that the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices. Counsel for the Union did not dispute that the issue stood 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), which had allowed such writ petitions granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Accordingly, the writ petition and pending applications were disposed of in terms of those judgments.

¶1

CWP-20079-2025 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

124

¶5

CWP-20079-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-18.07.2025

Jai Lal

....Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India & ors.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

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

¶12

Present: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate assisted by Ms. Alisha Chawla, Mr. Rishabh Singla, Mr. Peyush Pruthi and Ms. Aakriti, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing counsel for the respondents

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 30.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’); order dated 30.06.2025 issued under Section 148 A(3) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020.

¶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

¶20

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.23 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-20079-2025 (O&M)

¶22

¶23

whole records of the case.

¶24

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 30.06.2025 issued under Section 148 A(3) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 20192020 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.

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

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

¶28

(LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE

¶29

18.07.2025

¶30

Gaurav Arora

¶31

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

¶32

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.23 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jai Lal v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Lal 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