Allowed

Rahul v. Income Tax Officer Ward 3 Panchkula and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/21457/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition challenging the issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court held that the notice, issued by a jurisdictional Assessing Officer not through faceless assessment, was contrary to law. Relying on coordinate bench precedents, the court quashed the notice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 09.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) is hereby quashed. The respondents are granted liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

Rahul Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 3… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-21457-2025 (O&M)

¶2

Sr. No.158

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP-21457-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 29.07.2025

¶5

Rahul …Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Panchkula and o thers

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present : M r. Kartik Bansal, Advocate, f o r the petitioner.

¶11

M r. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel M s. Pridhi Sandhu, Advocate, f o r the respondent-Income Tax D e partment.

¶12

¶13

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

¶14

C hallenge made through the in s tant petition is to the notice dated 09.04.2 0 25 (Annexure P-1) issued to th e petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1 961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Offic e r which could have not been done because i n terms of the notification date d 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2), issued by the Ministry of Finance, Govern m ent of India, the impugned notice could h a ve been issued only by way of f aceless assessment. 2. I n support of his afore submis s ion, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following tw o judgments of this Court:-

¶15

i. CW P -15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07. 2 024; and

¶16

ii. CW P -21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others , decided on 29.07.2024.

¶17

VANDANA 2025.08.02 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

CWP-21457-2025 (O&M)

¶20

Learned counsel for the respond e nts does not dispute the fact that the case o f the petitioner is covered in hi s favour by the law laid down through the a f oresaid two judgments rendere d by two different co-ordinate Benches of th i s Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( supra) . 4. I n the light of the above, in te r ms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( supra), the impugned notice dated 09.04.2 0 25 (Annexure P-1), issued b y the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is her e by quashed with liberty to the r espondents to proceed against