Allowed

Vinod Agarwal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 Faridabad and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/11621/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this CWP, the Punjab and Haryana High Court addressed the validity of an income tax reopening notice issued directly by a jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Relying on two coordinate bench precedents establishing that such notices must now be issued via faceless assessment under the 2022 notification, the Court quashed the impugned notice dated 30.03.2024. The petition was allowed with liberty f

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 30.03.2024 was quashed. Liberty was granted to respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the law.

Vinod Agarwal Vs Assistant Com… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-11621-2025 (O&M)

¶2

Sr. No.158

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP-11621-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 28.04.2025

Vinod Agarw a l

… Petitioner

Versus

Assistant Co m missioner of Income Tax, Circl e 1, Faridabad and others

¶9

… Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

¶10

Present : M r. M.K. Singla, Advocate for M r. Kartik Bansal, Advocate, f o r the petitioner. M r. Varun Issar, Advocate, f o r the respondent-Income Tax D e partment. ***

¶11

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

¶12

C hallenge made through the in s tant petition is to the notice dated 30.03.2 0 24 (Annexure P-1) issued to th e petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1 961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that t h e impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Offic e r which could have not been done because i n terms of the notification date d 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2), issued by the Ministry of Finance, Govern m ent of India, the impugned notice could h a ve been issued only by way of f aceless assessment. 2. I n support of his afore submis s ion, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following tw o judgments of this Court:-

¶13

i. CW P -15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07. 2 024; and

¶14

VANDANA 2025.05.05 12:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

CWP-11621-2025 (O&M)

¶17

ii. CW P -21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others , decided on 29.07.2024.

¶18

Learned counsel for the respond e nts does not dispute the fact that the case o f the petitioner is covered in hi s favour by the law laid down through the a f oresaid two judgments rendere d by two different co-ordinate Benches of th i s Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). 4. I n the light of the above, in te r ms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( supra), the impugned notice dated 30.03.2 0 24 (Annexure P-1), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is her e by quashed with liberty to the r espondents to proceed against the petitioner i n accordance with law.