Abhishek Anirudh Joshi Alias Abhishek Joshi Vs Deputy… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Abhishek Anirudh Joshi Alias Abhishek Joshi 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 (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), i.e., on the lines of those co-ordinate Bench judgments allowing such petitions, with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure 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 07.04.2023 under Section 148, the order dated 07.04.2023 under Section 148A(d) and the notice dated 09.03.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and all consequential actions for AY 2019-2020, were validly issued, given that per the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices. +1 more

Court's answer

By disposing of the petition in terms of the said judgments, the relief granted therein applies — namely, liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is covered by the co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024) — a position not disputed by learned counsel for the Union of India — and is accordingly disposed of in terms of those decisions.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court, CWP-6366-2025 (O&M), decided 08.04.2025 (Arun Palli & Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma, J.) — Abhishek Anirudh Joshi @ Abhishek Joshi v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Chd & ors. The petitioner challenged (i) notice dated 07.04.2023 under Section 148, (ii) order dated 07.04.2023 under Section 148A(d) and (iii) notice dated 09.03.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020, on the ground that, per the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices and the Issuing Authority therefore had no jurisdiction. Counsel for the petitioner urged that the issue stood covered by co-ordinate Bench decisions 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. 215092023 and other connected matters, decided 29.07.2024); Standing Counsel for the revenue did not dispute this. Held: the petition is covered by those decisions and is disposed of in terms thereof, carrying the relief granted in them — liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Pending applications, if any, also disposed of.

CWP-6366-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

293

CWP-6366-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-08.04.2025

Abhishek Anirudh Joshi @ Abhishek Joshi Vs.

....Petitioner

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Chd & ors.

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. Nikhil Goyal and Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocates, for the petitioner.

Mrs.Urvashi Dhugga, Standing counsel for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 07.04.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); order dated 07.04.2023 issued under Section 148 A(d) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 09.03.2023 issued under Section 148 A(b) of the Act, 1961 and all 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. 215092023 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 2025.04.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-6366-2025

2

whole records of the case.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 07.04.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 07.04.2023 issued under Section 148 A(d) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 09.03.2023 issued under Section 148 A(b) 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.

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 08.04.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document