PAWAN KUMAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SAMANA AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/25476/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01133720202404 October 2024Author: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that instructions by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or make them otiose. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed mandatorily. The Court reiterated its view from previous judgments that instructions issued under Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, as well as powers under Section 144B (7 & 8), cannot allow authorities to usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. The Court found that notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B, were contrary to the provisions of the Act. Consequently, the notices dated February 28, 2023, March 16, 2023, March 20, 2023, March 30, 2023, and April 30, 2023, were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, if so advised.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pawan Kumar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent consequential proceedings. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Officer, Samana, and others, accepted notice. The High Court noted that the issue was identical to previous cases, specifically CWP No. 21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) decided on July 19, 2024, and a Coordinate Bench decision in CWP No. 15745 of 2023 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others) decided on July 9, 2024. These prior judgments had addressed the validity of faceless assessment proceedings initiated under Section 144B of the Act.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are valid and have jurisdiction. Assessee's Contention: The assessee, through the writ petition, implicitly challenged the validity of the notice and proceedings, relying on the precedent set by the High Court in similar cases. The petitioner sought to have the notice and subsequent actions set aside. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, accepted notice and did not present any arguments against the petitioner's claim, implicitly conceding to the legal position established in prior judgments. The judgment notes that both counsel were 'ad idem' that the issue was concluded by prior decisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 144B,Section 119,Section 120

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

105 IN TH Pawan Kumar

Income Tax O

CORAM: H

H

Present: M

M M f

* SANJEEV PR

1.

N

2.

M on behalf of th

3.

B present petitio No.21509 of decided on 29 2024 titled a decided on 19

C i o HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of r

V/s Officer, Samana and others

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALO

Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, Advocate f Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Stan Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standi for the respondent-Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior St he respondent-Income Tax Depa Both the counsel are ad idem on stands finally examined and c f 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs 9.07.2024, and by the Coordina as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. 9.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit S “16. We are in agreement with Coordinate Bench and hold t nstructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t AB AND HARYANA AT RH 25476-2024 (O&M) f Decision:04.10.2024

..…...Petitioner

…......Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA OK JAIN for the petitioner. nding Counsel and ing Counsel Department. tanding Counsel, accepts notice artment. that the issue involved in the concluded by this Court in CWP s. Union of India and others, ate Bench in CWP No.15745 of . Union of India and others, Singh (supra) held as under: the view taken by the that such circular or not have been issued to to make them otiose or r

s e e P , f , PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-25476-2

o i m S S a s a t a s i 1 o s w 1 C u p f o p d 3 f 1 l A 2 o p 2024 (O&M) obsolete. Legislative enactmen mplications are required to be mandatorily. By exercising the Sections 119 and 120 of the A Section 144B (7 & 8), the a allowed to usurp the legal pro satisfaction and convenience ca assessees. It also leaves confusio taxpayers. In the opinion of th and circulars can be issued on supplementing the statutory pro mplementation.

17.

In view of the aforesaid d occasion to distinguish or take suggested by the learned counse what has already been held by th

18.

Keeping in view the law Coordinate Bench (supra), notic under Section 148 of the proceedings initiated thereafter w faceless assessment as envisage of the Act, 1961, have been found provisions of the Act, 1961 an dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.202 30.03.2023 and order dated 30. for want of jurisdiction.

19.

The respondents-revenue w liberty to follow the procedure a Act, 1961 and proceed according

20.

All the writ petitions are order passed by the Court shall present order.” nts having financial e followed strictly and powers contained in Act, 1961 as well as authorities cannot be ovisions to their own ausing hardship to the on in the minds of the his Court, instructions nly for the purpose of ovisions and for their discussion, there is no e a different view as el for the revenue from he Coordinate Bench. w laid down by the ces issued by the JAO Act, 1961 and the without conducting the ed under Section 144B d to be contrary to the d accordingly notices 23, 20.03.2024 and 03.2023, are set aside would be, however, at as laid down under the gly, if so advised. allowed. The interim stand merged with the PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-25476-2

4.

K aforesaid term mutandis to th Assessing O consequential

5.

A

October 04, 2 Parul

Whether speak Whether Repor 2024 (O&M) Keeping in view above, we a ms. The observations and order p he present case. Accordingly, no fficer u/s 148 dated 28.03.2 l proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV 2024

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

:

Y allow this Writ Petition in the passed above shall apply mutatis otice issued by the Jurisdictional 2024 (Annexure P-1) and all nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

[ALOK JAIN] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No e s l l PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →