Deepak Suri Vs Income Tax Officer — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Deepak Suri Vs Income Tax Officer — 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 on 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided on 29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2022-2023, along with consequential proceedings, was validly issued by the respondent, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power in the NFAC to issue notices under Section 148.

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the coordinate-bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided on 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided on 29.07.2024), the issue raised being covered by those decisions, which counsel for the Union of India did not dispute.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court, CWP-9406-2025 (O&M), decided 03.04.2025 (Coram: Arun Palli and Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma, J.) — Deepak Suri v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), REAC, Chandigarh. Challenge to notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2022-2023 along with consequential proceedings, on the ground that the respondent had no jurisdiction to issue it, in view of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 specifically enumerating that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148. Counsel for the petitioner contended the issue was covered by coordinate-bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters, decided 29.07.2024), which had allowed writ petitions on the same issue granting the revenue liberty to follow the procedure under the Act, 1961 if so advised; counsel for the Union of India did not dispute this. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of those two decisions; pending applications, if any, were also disposed of.

CWP-9406-2025

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

128 CWP-9406-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-03.04.2025

Deepak Suri

....Petitioner

vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), REAC, Chandigarh ...Respondent

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

Present: Ms. Abhinav Narang, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing counsel for the respondent.

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

Challenge in the present writ petition is to notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) for AY 2022-2023 along with consequential proceedings.

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 2025.04.07 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-9406-2025

2

whole records of the case.

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for AY 2022-2023 along with consequential proceedings issued by respondent, 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

17.02.2025 Gaurav Arora

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

Gaurav Arora 2025.04.07 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document