Disposed

Gurtej Singh v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/4057/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenged a Section 148 notice for AY 2020-2021, alleging lack of jurisdiction due to CBDT circular reserving such power to NFAC. Following coordinated bench precedents, the petition was disposed of without adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty granted to revenue to follow procedure laid down in Act.

Gurtej Singh Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-4057-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

118

¶5

CWP-4057-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-14.02.2025

Gurtej Singh

....Petitioner

Vs.

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, ACIT/DCIT, Central Circle, Amritsar, Punjab & ors.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶12

Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocates for the petitioner

¶13

Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing counsel for Mr. Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing counsel for the respondent-Union of India.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 16.01.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “Act 1961”) for AY 2020-2021.

¶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

¶19

disputed the same.

¶20

Gaurav Arora 2025.02.19 13:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-4057-2025

¶22

¶23

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

¶24

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 16.01.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for AY 2020-2021 issued by respondent No. 1, on the ground that he 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.

¶25

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.

¶26