S.V. GUPTA HUF vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/11499/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01064159202413 August 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 15.03.2023, 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2023, 30.03.2023, and the consequential order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. This decision is based on the reasoning that such proceedings were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court explicitly agreed with the view taken by a Coordinate Bench in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India (CWP No.21509 of 2023, decided on 29.07.2024), which held that circulars or instructions by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or make them obsolete. The Court found no occasion to take a different view. The revenue is at liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly if so advised. The writ petitions are allowed, and the interim order stands merged with the present order.

What were the facts?

This judgment concerns a writ petition filed by S.V. Gupta HUF (the petitioner) against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, and another (the respondents/Revenue). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated but relate to proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The challenge is to notices issued under Section 148 dated 15.03.2023, 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2023, 30.03.2023, and an order dated 30.03.2023. The procedural history involves the issuance of these notices and the subsequent initiation of faceless assessment proceedings under Section 144B of the Act. The petitioner contends these actions are without jurisdiction and contrary to statutory provisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent faceless assessment proceedings under Section 144B of the Act, are valid when found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961, and issued without jurisdiction? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Sections 148 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that the notices issued under Section 148 and the subsequent faceless assessment proceedings under Section 144B are contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and have been initiated without jurisdiction. They rely on the High Court's decision in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India (CWP No.21509 of 2023, decided on 29.07.2024). Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel, does not appear to have raised any specific arguments against the petitioner's contentions, as the judgment notes that the counsel for both parties were 'ad idem' that the issue stands adjudicated in view of the previous judgment.

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

CWP-11499-202 246-25

IN TH S.V. GUPTA PR. COMMIS ANOTHER CORAM: H

H Present: M

M M

SANJEEV P

1.

Both th petition this Co of India under: b i o o 24 (O&M)

Page 1 of 3 HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

HUF Vs.

SSIONER OF INCOME TAX, F **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN **** Mr. Vivek Bansal, Advocate Mr. Vishal Chechi, Advocate Mr. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Co for the respondents/Revenue. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) he counsel are ad idem that the n stands finally adjudicated in v ourt in CWP No.21509 of 2023 a and others, decided on 29.07.2 “16. We are in agreemen by the Coordinate Bench and hol nstructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t obsolete. Legislative enactments AB AND HARYANA AT RH CWP-11499-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.08.2024 . . . . Petitioner FARIDABAD AND . . . . Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH ounsel ) e issue involved in the present view of the judgment passed by titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union 2024, wherein this Court held as nt with the view taken ld that such circular or not have been issued to to make them otiose or s having financial be

) 4

r s t y n s MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-11499-202 f p 1 c o t t s n s w C u i a A p d 3 f a t i w 2. Keepin terms. 24 (O&M)

Page 2 of 3 followed strictly and mandator powers contained Sections 119 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 cannot be allowed to usurp the le own satisfaction and convenienc the assessees. It also leaves conf the taxpayers instructions an statutory provisions and 17. In view of the aforesa no occasion to distinguish or ta suggested by the learned counse what has already been held by th 18. Keeping in view the Coordinate Bench (supra), noti under Section 148 of the Act, 196 nitiated thereafter without con assessment as envisaged under Act, 1961, have been found to 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-reven at liberty to follow the procedur the Act, 1961 and proceed accord 20. All the writ petition nterim order passed by the Cou with the present order.”

ng in view above, we allow this The observations and order pa rily. By exercising the and 120 of the Act, 7 & 8), the authorities egal provisions to their ce causing hardship to nfusion in the minds of d supplementing the aid discussion, there is ake a different view as el for the revenue from he Coordinate Bench. law laid down by the ces issued by the JAO 61 and the proceedings nducting the faceless r Section 144B of the o be contrary to the d accordingly notices 23, 20.03.2024 and 03.2023, are set aside nue would be, however, re as laid down under dingly, if so advised. ns are allowed. The urt shall stand merged s Writ Petition in the aforesaid assed above shall apply mutatis

d s MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-11499-202 mutand 15.03.2 3. All pen

August 13, 202 Mohit goyal 1. Whethe 2. Whethe 24 (O&M)

Page 3 of 3 dis to the present case. Acco 2024 and all consequential proce nding applications also stand disp

(SANJ 24 r speaking/reasoned?

Y r reportable?

Y ordingly, notice u/s 148 dated edings are set aside. posed of accordingly. JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No

d MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 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 →