M/S Jujhar Construction and Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

M/S Jujhar Construction and Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy… — 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 (19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 29.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the consequential actions for AY 2019-2020 suffer from lack of jurisdiction of the Issuing Authority, in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 stating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices.

Court's answer

The issue raised in this petition is 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), in which writ petitions on the same issue were allowed, granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Ratio / Principle

The present writ petition stands disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh’s case (decided 29.07.2024).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Sudeepti Sharma, J.; Lisa Gill, J.) disposed of CWP-28335-2023 (O&M), decided 21.04.2025, challenging a notice dated 29.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and 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 vesting exclusive power in the NFAC to issue Section 148 notices. Finding the issue identical to Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024) — in which like writ petitions were allowed with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961, if so advised — the Court disposed of the petition in terms of those decisions; pending applications, if any, were also disposed of. The Union of India did not dispute the coverage.

CWP-28335-2023

1

N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

280 CWP-28335-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision:-21.04.2025

M/s Jujhar Construction and Travels Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner

Vs.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana

...Respondent

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

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

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

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 29.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020.

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

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.23 12:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-28335-2023

2

disputed the same.

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

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 29.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and consequential actions, for AY 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.

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

21.04.2025 Gaurav Arora

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

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.23 12:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document