RAMPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/36097/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01196007202523 December 2025Author: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. In Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case, the Court had held that Section 151A of the Act, read with notification dated 29.03.2022, clearly indicates that the scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148/148A. The Court found no ambiguity in the statutory provisions and stated that office memorandums or other instructions cannot override these statutory provisions. The Co-ordinate Bench had allowed the writ petitions in those cases, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the prescribed procedure and proceed accordingly if so advised. The present judgment follows this precedent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rampal, challenged a notice dated 16.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2021-2022. The challenge was based on the ground that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction, citing a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 which allegedly vests exclusive power to issue such notices with the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The petitioner argued that this issue was covered by previous judgments of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same High Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh. The respondents, the Income Tax Officer and others, did not dispute that the issue was covered by these prior decisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 16.06.2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2021-2022, is invalid due to lack of jurisdiction by the issuing authority, in light of the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 which purportedly grants exclusive power to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) to issue such notices? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the Section 148 notice, relying on the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022. They further contended that the issue is squarely covered by the judgments of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. Revenue's Contention: The respondents did not dispute that the issue involved was covered in favour of the petitioner by the aforementioned judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151A,Section 148A,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-36097 of 2025 (O&M)

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-36097 of 2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 23.12.2025

Rampal

..... Petitioner

Versus

Income Tax Officer and others

..... Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL

Present: Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel

Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing Counsel

for respondents-Income Tax Department.

**** LISA GILL, J.

1.

Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 16.06.2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’), for the Assessment Year 2021-2022 and all subsequent proceedings on the ground that Issuing Authority had no juri iction to issue the same, in view of circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive power to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by judgment passed by a Co-ordinate 2025.12.24 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-36097 of 2025 (O&M)

-2- India and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. 3. It is submitted that Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Relevant portion of decision dated 19.07.2024 in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) reads as under:- “15. From the perusal of Section 151A, it is quite evident that scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148 as well as 148A. Clause 3(b) of notification dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A clearly provides that scheme would be applicable to notice under Section 148. Even otherwise, it is a settled proposition of law that assessment proceedings commence from the stage of issuance of show cause notice. The object of introduction of faceless assessment would be defeated if show cause notice under Section 148 is issued by Juri ictional Assessing Officer. The respondents are heavily placing reliance upon office memorandum and letter issued by departmental authorities. It is axiomatic in tax jurisprudence that circulars, instructions and letters issued by Board or any other authority cannot override statutory provisions. The circulars are binding upon authorities and Courts are not bound by circulars. The mandate of Section 144B, 151A readwith notification SANJAY KHAN 2025.12.24 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-36097 of 2025 (O&M)

-3- dated 29.03.2022 issued thereunder is quite lucid. There is no ambiguity in the language of statutory provisions, thus, office memorandum or any other instruction issued by Board or any other authority cannot be relied upon.”

4.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute that issue involved is covered in favour of petitioner in view of abovesaid decisions.

5.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, present writ petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024. 6. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

(LISA GILL)

JUDGE

(VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 23.12.2025

JUDGE s.khan Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SANJAY KHAN 2025.12.24 12:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity 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 →