Dismissed

Abhishek Jain v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/18064/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged notices issued under sections 148, 148A(d), 142(1), and 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2020-2021, arguing the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction as per CBDT Circular. Bench disposed of the petition relying on prior judgments by coordinate benches allowing such notices.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in terms of previous judgments of coordinate benches; liberty granted to revenue to proceed.

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

¶1

CWP-18064-2025 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

127

¶4

CWP-18064-2025 Date of decision: 04.07.2025

Abhishek Jain

...Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others ...Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate assisted by Ms. Alisha Chawla, Ms. Ambika Jindal, Mr. Aditya Gupta and Mr. Atharav Prabhakar, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel (Through VC) Mr. V. Vedika Rao, Advocate for the respondents.

¶12

¶13

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶14

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 29.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’); order dated 29.02.2024 issued under Section 148 A(d) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 20.08.2024 issued under Section 142 (1) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 26.03.2025 issued under Sections 148 A(1) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021.

¶15

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.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed

¶17

Gaurav Arora 2025.07.14 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CWP-18064-2025 [2]

¶19

the same.

¶20

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

¶21

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 29.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 29.02.2024 issued under Section 148 A(d) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 20.08.2024 issued under Section 142 (1) of the Act, 1961; notice dated 26.03.2025 issued under Sections 148 A(1) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021 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.

¶22

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case

¶23

(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.

¶24

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.

¶25