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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition 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), under which like petitions challenging Section 148 notices were allowed with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; all pending applications also disposed of.

¶¶26 (judgment para 7)

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 19.05.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2022-2023 (and consequential actions) was validly issued, given the petitioner's 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.

¶¶24 (judgment para 5)

Court's answer

As the issue raised is the same as that decided by the Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), which decisions the revenue did not dispute, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of those decisions.

¶¶26 (judgment para 7)

Ratio / Principle

By disposal in terms of the precedents followed, the petition takes the same course as those cases, namely allowance of like writ petitions with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶¶25 (judgment para 6)

Key takeaways

All pending applications, if any, in the present writ petition also stand disposed of.ratio¶¶27 (judgment para 8)

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (bench: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Lisa Gill and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma; opinion by Sudeepti Sharma, J.), CWP-20133-2025 (O&M), decision dated 18.07.2025. Petitioner (Ishan Gupta) challenged a notice dated 19.05.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential actions for AY 2022-2023, contending that the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction because a CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vests exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC. Learned counsel relied on the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters, decided 29.07.2024); counsel for Union of India did not dispute the position. The Court heard counsel, perused the record, and disposed of the writ petition in terms of those two decisions, under which such petitions were allowed with liberty to the revenue to follow the statutory procedure and proceed accordingly, if so advised; all pending applications were also disposed of.

CWP-20133-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

135

CWP-20133-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-18.07.2025

Ishan Gupta

....Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India & ors.

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. Ish Puneet Singh, Mr. Ravinder Singh, Mr. Sourav, Advocates 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 instant writ petition is to notice dated 19.05.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and all consequential actions, for AY 2022-2023.

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. 21509-2023 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

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

CWP-20133-2025

2

whole records of the case.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 19.05.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2022-2023 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 18.07.2025

Gaurav Arora

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

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