The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a writ petition challenging a Section 148 notice issued for AY 2016-2017 on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. Relying on recent coordinate bench judgments
The writ petition was disposed of allowing the petitioner's contentions to proceed as per the coordinate bench judgments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP-458-2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
131
CWP-458-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-13.01.2025
Bansal Sweet House
....Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India & ors.
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present: Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate & Mr. Rohit Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-Union of India.
SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.
Gaurav Arora 2025.01.22 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-458-2025
2
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.
Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024
(ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE
13.01.2025 Gaurav Arora
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
Gaurav Arora 2025.01.22 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer for AY 2016-2017 is valid when the jurisdiction is alleged to belong exclusively to the NFAC.
Whether the writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the notice under Section 148 for AY 2016-2017 can be decided by following the precedent set in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh cases.
Whether the pending applications in the matter stand disposed of along with the writ petition.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and othersFollowed¶2
Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others
Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and othersFollowed¶2
Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Bansal Sweet House
Union of India
ARUN PALLI
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
