Disposed

Rakhi Juneja v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/15572/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a writ petition challenging income tax notices issued under Sections 148 and 151 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2021-2022. Relying on subsequent coordinate bench decisions, the court held the issue was legally settled.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to revenue to follow procedure under the Act if advised.

Rakhi Juneja Vs Union of India and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-15572-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

302

¶5

CWP-15572-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-29.05.2025

Rakhi Juneja

....Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India and ors.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶12

Present: Mr.Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondents.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); approval dated 26.03.2025 issued under Section 151 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022.

¶17

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 .

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same.

¶19

Gaurav Arora 2025.06.03 13:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-15572-2025

¶21

¶22

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case.

¶23

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; approval dated 26.03.2025 issued under Section 151 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2021-2022, on the ground that the Issuing Authority 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.

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26