GURINDER SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

Facts

The petitioner, Gurinder Singh, challenged a notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2020-2021. The notice was issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Chandigarh. The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction due to a CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, which purportedly grants exclusive power to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) to issue such notices. The respondent-Union of India did not dispute this contention. The High Court considered previous judgments on similar issues.

Held

The High Court allowed the writ petition, disposing of it in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (decided on 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh’s case (decided on 29.07.2024). These prior judgments had allowed similar writ petitions on the same issue, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the prescribed procedure under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly if so advised. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's argument regarding the lack of jurisdiction of the issuing authority due to the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, which was not disputed by the revenue. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition in line with the precedents, implying the quashing of the impugned notice and allowing the revenue to re-initiate the process if they chose to do so by following the correct procedure.

Key Issues

1. Whether the notice dated 30.03.2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2020-2021, is invalid due to lack of jurisdiction of the issuing authority (Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Chandigarh) in light of the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, which allegedly vests exclusive power in the NFAC to issue such notices? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the Income Tax Officer lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148, relying on the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, which purportedly states that the NFAC has exclusive power. The petitioner cited the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023) as covering the present issue. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel appearing for the Union of India did not dispute the petitioner's contentions.