Allowed

Vidya Sethi v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Faridabad and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/11865/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order allowed a writ petition against invalid tax notices issued to the petitioner by the Income Tax Officer. The court set aside the notices dated March 2025 and consequential proceedings, relying on prior precedents holding that such notices without faceless assessment under Section 144B violate statutory provisions.

What did the court decide?

The notice dated 28.03.2025 and all consequential proceedings are set aside, and pending applications are disposed of.

Vidya Sethi Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)… — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

155 I N THE HIGH COURT OF PU N JAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIG A RH

¶2

C WP-11865-2025 (O&M) D ate of Decision: 08.05.2025

¶3

Vidya Sethi …Petitioner

¶4

Vs.

¶5

Income Tax O fficer Ward 2 (3) Faridabad an d others …Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

¶7

Present: M r. Anurag Sharma, Advocate f o r the petitioner. ***

¶8

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)

¶9

N otice of motion.

¶10

M r. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Pridhi Sandhu ,

¶11

Jr. Standing C ounsel, accepts notice on behal f of the revenue.

¶12

L earned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the substantia l issue involve d in the present petition stands f inally examined and conclude d by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others , decided on 29.07.2024, a n d by the Coordinate Bench i n CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others , d e cided on 19.07.2024. This Cou r t in Jasjit Singh (supra) held a s under:

¶13

“ 16. We are in agreement with t h e view taken by the Coordinat e B ench and hold that such circu l ar or instructions by the Boar d c ould not have been issued to ov e rride statutory provisions or to

¶14

RAJESH KUMAR 2025.05.12 10:32 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶15

[2]

¶16

CWP-11865-2025 (O&M)

¶17

make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation.

¶18

17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench.

¶19

18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction.

¶20

19. The respondents-revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶21

RAJESH KUMAR 2025.05.12 10:32 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶22

[3]

¶23

CWP-11865-2025 (O&M)

¶24

20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed

¶25

by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.”

¶26

Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, dated 28.03.2025 and all consequential proceedings are set aside.

¶27

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶28

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

¶29

(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE

¶30

08.05.2025 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No

¶31

RAJESH KUMAR 2025.05.12 10:32 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Vidya Sethi v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Faridabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidya Sethi v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Faridabad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases