M/S VV INTERNATIONAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR-1, AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
CWP/23769/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01107589202220 December 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal, in light of the consensus between the parties, allowed the petition. The court noted that the learned counsel for the parties agreed that the petitioner would be entitled to the same relief as granted in a judgment of the court dated 26.07.2022, passed in CWP-15791-2024 – Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and others. Consequently, the petition was allowed in terms of the said judgment, resulting in the quashing of the impugned notice dated 10.09.2022 issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with consequential proceedings. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of. The ratio decidendi is that where parties agree to parity with a prior binding precedent, the court will grant the same relief without re-examining the merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s VV International, filed a writ petition before the Punjab & Haryana High Court challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated but the notice under challenge is dated 10.09.2022. The petitioner sought to quash this notice and any consequential proceedings. The procedural history indicates that the parties agreed that the petitioner would receive the same relief as granted in a previous case, CWP-15791-2024, titled Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and others, decided by the same court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact, concerning the validity of reassessment proceedings). Contentions: Assessee: The assessee argued that the impugned notice should be quashed, seeking parity with the relief granted in the case of Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and others. The assessee relied on the judgment in Jyoti Sareen's case for this contention. Revenue: The revenue, through its counsel, agreed that the petitioner should be entitled to the same relief as granted in the aforementioned judgment. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue beyond this consensus.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HI

Sr. No. 101 M/s VV Internat Principal Comm Jalandhar and an

CORAM : HO

Present : Mr

(th

for DEEPAK SIBA 1.

Le be entitled to the dated 10.09.202 and others. 2.

In of Jyoti Sareen’ 27.07.2022 (An Income Tax Act 3.

Pen

11.09.2026 shamsher

IGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HAR

tional

Versus missioner of Income Tax, nother

ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY r. S. K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the hrough VC). r. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Standi r. Vidul Kapoor, Junior Standing r the respondent(s)-revenue. * * * * * AL, J. (Oral) arned counsel for the parties agr e same relief as has been granted 26 passed in CWP-15791-2024 – the light of the above consensus ’s case (supra), resulting in quash nnexure P-8) issued to the petit t, 1961, alongwith consequential p nding miscellaneous application(s

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : Yes RYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23769-2022 (O&M) Date of decision : 11.09.2026

.…. Petitioner

..... Respondents K SIBAL Y VASHISTH petitioner ng Counsel g Counsel, ree that the petitioner would also through a judgment of this Court – Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India s, the petition is allowed in terms hing of the impugned notice dated tioner under Section 148 of the proceedings, if any. s), if any, also stand disposed of. [DEEPAK SIBAL] JUDGE [SANJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE s / No s / No

o t a s d e SHAMSHER SINGH 2026.09.17 15:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and 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 →