Allowed

Jai Gopal Developers Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2026CWP/8022/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a writ petition challenging an income tax notice under Section 148. The court followed two coordinate bench precedents, disposing of the petition and permitting the revenue to proceed according to the Act.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of in terms of precedents set by coordinate benches; liberty granted to the revenue to proceed as per the Act.

Jai Gopal Developers Private Limited Vs Assistant… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-8022-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

139 CWP-8022-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-21.03.2025

¶5

Jai Gopal Developers Pvt. Ltd.

¶6

....Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak & ors. ...Respondents

¶9

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

¶10

Present: Mr. B.M. Monga, Mr. Rohit Kaura and Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr V. Vedika Rao, Advocate for the respondent.

¶12

¶13

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶14

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “Act 1961”) and 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 the same.

¶17

Gaurav Arora 2025.03.25 13:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CWP-8022-2025

¶19

¶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 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and 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

¶23

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.

¶24