JASKINDER KAUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/24940/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01129518202426 September 2024Author: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that instructions issued by the Board (Central Board of Direct Taxes) cannot override statutory provisions or be issued to make them obsolete. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly and mandatorily. The Court found that by exercising powers under Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), authorities cannot usurp legal provisions for their own convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. Instructions and circulars can only supplement statutory provisions for their implementation. Therefore, notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 and consequential proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessment under Section 144B were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act and set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act and proceed accordingly, if so advised. The Court relied on its previous decisions in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Jaskinder Kaur, challenged notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings initiated thereafter. The petitioner argued that these proceedings were initiated without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act. The revenue, represented by Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel, accepted notice. The High Court noted that similar issues had been decided by coordinate benches in previous writ petitions, specifically CWP No. 21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) and CWP No. 15745 of 2023 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others), both decided on July 19, 2024. The present petition was filed in 2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings initiated thereafter, without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are valid? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Sections 148 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The proceedings were initiated without conducting the mandatory faceless assessment as required by Section 144B of the Act, rendering them invalid. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not present any specific arguments against the assessee's contention, but their counsel accepted notice and were present during the proceedings.

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

116 IN TH JASKINDER K

INCOME TAX

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 o i HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of KAUR

V X OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MUK HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ

Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for t Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Stan Ms. Samdesha Kaur, Advocate for the respondent/Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior St he respondents/Income Tax Dep 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 Si “16. We are in agreement with Coordinate Bench and hold t instructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t obsolete. Legislative enactmen implications are required to be AB AND HARYANA AT RH 24940-2024 (O&M) f Decision:26.09.2024

..…...Petitioners (s) V/s. KTSAR, PUNJAB AND OTHERS

…......Respondent(s) NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH the petitioner. nding Counsel, with Department. tanding Counsel, accepts notice partment. 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 nts having financial e followed strictly and ) e e P , f , Suresh Kumar 2024.09.27 09:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-24940-202

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

4.

K aforesaid term 024 (O&M) 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 implementation.

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 foun 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.” Keeping in view above, we a ms. The observations and order p 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 nd 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 allow this Writ Petition in the passed above shall apply mutatis e s Suresh Kumar 2024.09.27 09:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-24940-202

mutandis to th Assessing O consequential

5.

A

September 26 Ess Kay

Whether speak Whether Repor 024 (O&M) he present case. Accordingly, no Officer u/s 148 dated 28.02.2 l proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV 6, 2024 [SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

:

Y otice issued by the Jurisdictional 2024 (Annexure P-3) and all nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No l l Suresh Kumar 2024.09.27 09:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity 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 →