ASHU MOHAN PUNCHHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CWP/23423/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01122917202413 September 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the proceedings initiated thereafter, including those under Section 144B, were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act. The Court relied on its previous decision in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on July 29, 2024, and a coordinate bench's decision in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on July 19, 2024. The reasoning was that instructions by the Board (circulars) cannot override statutory provisions or make them obsolete. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly and mandatorily. The Court emphasized that authorities cannot usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion. Therefore, the notices dated February 28, 2023, March 16, 2023, March 20, 2023, March 30, 2023, and the order dated August 30, 2024, were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act if so advised. The operative direction was to allow the writ petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Ashu Moha and others, challenged notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings, including orders passed by the Assessing Officer. The assessment years are not explicitly stated, but the notices were dated between February 28, 2023, and March 30, 2023, with a further notice under Section 148 dated August 30, 2024. The core of the challenge relates to the procedure followed, particularly concerning faceless assessments as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Department, accepted notice. The case was heard by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessments as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are valid and in accordance with the law? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 148 and Section 144B). Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the proceedings initiated under Section 148 and subsequent actions, including faceless assessments under Section 144B, were contrary to the provisions of the Act. They relied on the High Court's own previous decisions in similar matters. Revenue's contention: The revenue, through its senior standing counsel, accepted notice and did not present any arguments against the assessee's position, implicitly agreeing with the precedent set by the coordinate bench.

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

131 IN TH ASHU MOHA

ASSISTANT AYKAR BHAW

CORAM: H

Present: M M M

M M f

* SANJEEV PR

1.

N 2. M behalf of the r 3. B present petiti CWP No.215 decided on 29 2024 titled a decided on 19

C i o o i HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of AN PUNCHHI

V COMMISSIONER OF INCOM WAN, CHANDIGARH

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advoca Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate a Ms. Pranika Singla, Advocate for Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Stand Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Co for the respondent-Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Stan respondent-Income Tax Departm Both the counsel are ad idem ion stands finally examined an 509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh 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 23423-2024 (O&M) f Decision:13.09.2024 ..…...Petitioners (s) V/s. ME TAX, DCIT/ACIT, CIR1(1), ......Respondent(s) NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH ate, assisted by and r the petitioner. ding Counsel, with ounsel, Department nding Counsel, accepts notice on ment that the issue involved in the nd concluded by this Court in h vs. 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

n e n , f , Suresh Kumar 2024.09.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-23423-20

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 mutandis to th 024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 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 he present case. Accordingly, no

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 otice issued by the Jurisdictional e s l Suresh Kumar 2024.09.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-23423-20

Assessing O consequential 5. A

September 13 Ess Kay

Whether speak Whether Repor 024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 Officer u/s 148 dated 30.08 l proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV 3, 2024 [SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

8.2024 (Annexure P-1), and nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No d Suresh Kumar 2024.09.13 17:53 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 →