Bhupinder Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Bhupinder Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the petitioner's appeal in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh; all pending applications, if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 28.07.2022 under Section 148, the assessment order and demand notice dated 31.05.2023 under Sections 147 and 156 respectively, and all consequential actions for AY 2017-2018, are sustainable in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148.

Court's answer

The issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh, which allowed writ petitions on the same issue while granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner's appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax - Section 148 notice - NFAC exclusive power - Punjab & Haryana HC disposed of CWP-8426-2025 (O&M) in which Bhupinder Singh challenged a notice dated 28.07.2022 under Section 148, an assessment order dated 31.05.2023 under Section 147 and a demand notice dated 31.05.2023 under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with consequential actions, for AY 2017-2018, on the ground that per the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 the NFAC alone has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices. Following 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), and since the petitioner's appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority, the Court (Arun Palli and Sudeepti Sharma JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma J.) directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal in terms of those judgments; pending applications stood disposed of.

CWP-8426-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

137

CWP-8426-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-02.04.2025

Bhupinder Singh

....Petitioner

Vs.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, 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. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing counsel for the respondent-department. ***

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 28.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); impugned assessment order dated 31.05.2023 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961, demand notice dated 31.05.2023 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2017-2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the above 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 for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority.

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.04 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-8426-2025

2

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not 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 28.07.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; impugned assessment order dated 31.05.2023 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961, demand notice dated 31.05.2023 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2017-2018, 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.

Since in the present case, the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner, in terms of the judgments mentioned above.

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

(ARUN PAL JUDGE	LI) (SU	DEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE
02.04.2025
Gaurav Arora
	Whether speaking/reasoned	_:_Yes/No
	Whether reportable	_:_Yes/No

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.04 12:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document