BALJIT SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/21638/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01112472202431 August 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that circulars or instructions issued by the Board could not override statutory provisions or render them otiose. It was emphasized that financial implications arising from legislative enactments must be followed strictly and mandatorily. Authorities, by exercising powers under Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961, as well as Section 144B(7 & 8), cannot usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion to taxpayers. Instructions and circulars are permissible only for supplementing statutory provisions and their implementation. Following the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench in Jasjit Singh (supra), the Court found that notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 and proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, were contrary to the Act. Consequently, the notices dated 23.03.2024 under Section 148A(d) and Section 148, and the consequential proceedings, were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The respondents were granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, if advised. The writ petition was allowed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Baljit Singh, filed a writ petition challenging notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) under Section 148A(d) and Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, both dated 23.03.2024, and the consequential proceedings. The revenue was represented by Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel. Both parties agreed that the issue had been conclusively decided by the High Court in previous writ petitions, namely CWP No. 21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) decided on 19.07.2024, and CWP No. 15745 of 2023 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others) decided on 29.07.2024. The present petition was filed in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings initiated without conducting a faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961? (Question of law and fact, concerning Sections 148 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued, by reference to previous judgments of the Coordinate Bench, that notices issued and proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessments as per Section 144B are contrary to the Act and liable to be set aside. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel was ad idem with the petitioner's counsel, indicating agreement with the stands finally examined and concluded in the cited previous judgments. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue beyond this agreement.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-21638-2

111

I Baljit Singh

Income Tax O

CORAM: H

Present M M

SANJEEV P 1.

N 2.

M behalf of the r 3.

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

[1] 2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA C D

Vs. Officer and others

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RI Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for th ***

RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Notice of motion. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Stand revenue. 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 th Bench and hold that such circul could not have been issued to ov make them otiose or obsolete. NJAB AND HARYANA ARH CWP-21638-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.08.2024

…Petitioner

…Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ITU TAGORE he petitioner.

) ding Counsel accepts notice on 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: he view taken by the Coordinate lar or instructions by the Board verride statutory provisions or to Legislative enactments having

n e P , f , e d o g RAJESH KUMAR 2024.09.03 09:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

[2]

CWP-21638-2024 (O&M)

financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 19. The respondents-revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” RAJESH KUMAR 2024.09.03 09:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

[3]

CWP-21638-2024 (O&M)

Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148A(d) dated 23.03.2024 and under Section 148 dated 23.03.2024 and consequential proceedings are set aside. 5.

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(RITU TAGORE)

JUDGE 31.08.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable?

: Yes/No

RAJESH KUMAR 2024.09.03 09:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →