M/S Radiant Digitek Network Limited Vs Deputy… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

M/S Radiant Digitek Network Limited Vs Deputy… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra) and Jasjit Singh's case (supra); the Co-ordinate Bench in those cases had allowed writ petitions on the same issue, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequential actions for AY 2020-2021 were 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.

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of 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 had allowed writ petitions on the same issue by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Ratio / Principle

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

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Sudeepti Sharma, J.; coram Lisa Gill and Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.), deciding CWP-2740-2024 (O&M) on 09.07.2025: Writ petition by M/s Radiant Digitek Network Ltd. challenging a notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequential actions for AY 2020-2021, on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices. The Union of India did not dispute the contention. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh v. Union of India (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed writ petitions on the same issue with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All pending applications were also disposed of.

CWP-2740-2024

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

277

CWP-2740-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:-09.07.2025

M/s Radiant Digitek Network Ltd.

....Petitioner

Vs.

Dy. Commissione of Income Tax, Centgral Circle-2, Ludhiana

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Nitika Garg, Advocate for the respondents.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021.

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.

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.18 15:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-2740-2024

2

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

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021, 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

09.07.2025

Gaurav Arora

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

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.18 15:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document