Disposed

Bansal the Food House Private Limited v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/451/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued by an Assessing Officer against the petitioner for AY 2021-2022. The petitioner argued that only the NFAC could issue such notices per a CBDT notification. Relying on two recent coordinate bench decisions that dismissed similar challenges, the court disposed o

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of allowing the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 if so advised, based on the decisions in the referenced coordinate bench cases.

Bansal the Food House Private Limited Vs Union of India… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-451-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

126 CWP-451-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-13.01.2025

¶5

Bansal The Food House Pvt. Ltd.

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Union of India & ors.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

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

¶11

Present: Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate &

¶12

Mr. Rohit Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner

¶13

Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-Union of India.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 13.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) 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 2025.01.22 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-451-2025

¶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 13.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 for AY 2021-2022 issued by respondent No. 3, 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.

¶24

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

¶25

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