Quashed

Satish Talwar v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 Chandigarh

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/14085/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana quashed a notice dated 28.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer as it violated the mandate of faceless assessment under the notification dated 29.03.2022.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice dated 28.03.2024 is quashed with liberty to respondent to proceed according to law.

Satish Talwar Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

( Sr. No. 111 ) CWP No.14085 of 2025 Date of decision: 16.05.2025

Satish Talwar

.....Petitioner

Versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh

¶7

.....Respondent

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

¶9

Present : Mr. Atul Mandhar, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶11

¶12

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. ( Oral )

¶13

(1) Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 28.03.2024 (Annexure P-1) issued to the petitioner by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer which could not have been done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-3), issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment.

¶14

(2) In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court :-

¶15

SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.19 18:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

¶16

CWP No.14085 of 2025

¶17

[2]

¶18

(i) CWP No.15745 of 2024 - Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024.

¶19

(ii) CWP No.21509 of 2023 - Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024.

¶20

(3) Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s and Jasjit Singh’s cases (supra).

¶21

(4) In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s and Jasjit Singh’s cases (supra), the impugned notice dated 28.03.2024 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondent to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶22

(5) The petition is allowed in the above terms.

¶23

(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE

¶24

16.05.2025 ( LAPITA BANERJI ) sunil yadav JUDGE

¶25

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

¶26

SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.19 18:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

Satish Talwar v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Talwar v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 Chandigarh

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