Inderpal Singh Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Inderpal Singh Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), entailing liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 21.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (and all consequential actions) for AY 2020-2021 was issued without jurisdiction, the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 having vested exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC.

Court's answer

The issue involved in the present 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 (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which allowed writ petitions on the same issue; learned counsel for the Union of India did not dispute this.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the coverage by the said Co-ordinate Bench decisions, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (decided 29.07.2024), i.e., with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Key takeaways

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

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Coram: Arun Palli & Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.; judgment by Sudeepti Sharma, J.), CWP-7611-2025 (O&M), decided 19.03.2025 — Inder Pal Singh v. Asstt. Commissioner Income Tax, Circle 1, Faridabad & ors. Challenge to notice dated 21.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential actions for AY 2020-2021, on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction, the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 having specifically vested exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC. Held: issue covered by Co-ordinate Bench rulings in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which allowed writ petitions on the same issue and which Union of India counsel did not dispute; writ petition disposed of in terms of those decisions, with liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised; pending applications disposed of.

CWP-7611-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

191

CWP-7611-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-19.03.2025

Inder Pal Singh

....Petitioner

Vs.

Asstt. Commissioner Income Tax , Circle 1, Faridabad & ors.

...Respondents

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

Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Mr. Ubhai Bharti Gupta, Advocates 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 instant writ petition is to notice dated 21.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) 0nd all 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.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

Gaurav Arora 2025.03.24 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-7611-2025

2

whole records of the case.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 21.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all 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.

(ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE

19.03.2025

Gaurav Arora

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

Gaurav Arora 2025.03.24 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document