Gopal Sharma Vs Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Gopal Sharma Vs Income Tax Officer 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 (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024); per those precedents such petitions were allowed with 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 disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No. 1 (Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), Ludhiana) had jurisdiction to issue the notice dated 26.03.2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2020-2021, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue such notices.

Court's answer

The present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed writ petitions raising the same issue regarding Section 148 notices.

Key takeaways

All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.obiter¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh (Arun Palli and Sudeepti Sharma JJ.; decision dated 25.02.2025) disposed of CWP-5289-2025 (O&M) brought by Gopal Sharma challenging the notice dated 26.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2020-2021 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), Ludhiana (respondent No. 1), on the ground that, in terms of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, the NFAC alone had exclusive power to issue such notices. Counsel for the petitioner contended, and counsel for the Union of India did not dispute, that the issue was settled by the Co-ordinate Bench judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India (CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh v. Union of India (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters, decided 29.07.2024), which allowed like writ petitions while granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 if so advised. Accordingly, this Bench disposed of the petition in terms of those judgments, along with all pending applications.

CWP-5289-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

139

CWP-5289-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-25.02.2025

Gopal Sharma

....Petitioner

Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1) Ludhiana & ors.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 26.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “Act 1961”) 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.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

Gaurav Arora 2025.02.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-5289-2025

2

whole records of the case.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 26.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for AY 2020-2021 issued by respondent No. 1, on the ground that he 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.

(ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE

25.02.2025

Gaurav Arora

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

Gaurav Arora 2025.02.28 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document