Disposed

M/S Hartal Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle I and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/16822/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a writ petition challenging an Income Tax notice dated 21.03.2023 issued under Section 148 for AY 2021-2022. The court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the petitioner's pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the petitioner's pending appeal.

M/S Hartal Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-16822-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

257 CWP-16822-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-29.05.2025

¶5

M/s Hartal Builders & Developers Ltd.

¶6

....Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle I, Gurugram & ors.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

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

¶11

Present: Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with

¶12

Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Mr. Puneet Aggarwal, Mr. Yuvraj Singh, Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing counsel for the respondents.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 21.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘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. 215092023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority.

¶18

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

¶19

Gaurav Arora 2025.06.03 13:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-16822-2025

¶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 21.03.2023 issued under Section 148 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

Since in the present case, the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner, in terms of the judgments mentioned above.

¶26