Allowed

Lokesh Chand Gupta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CWP/833/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2015-16. The petitioner contended the local authority lacked jurisdiction as the NFAC has exclusive power per a CBDT circular. Relying on prior coordinate judgments, the Court allowed the petition in terms of the earlier decisions.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case and Jasjit Singh's case; pending applications disposed of.

Lokesh Chand Gupta Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-833-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

128

¶5

CWP-833-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-15.01.2025

Lokesh Chand Gupta

....Petitioner

Vs.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & ors.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

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

¶12

Present: Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner

¶13

Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing counsel for the respondent-Union of India.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶16

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 30.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and conseuqential proceedings, for AY 2015-2016.

¶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

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶20

Gaurav Arora 2025.01.21 14:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

CWP-833-2025

¶22

¶23

whole records of the case.

¶24

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.08.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, for AY 2015-16 issued by respondent No. 1, 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.

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27