NARESH AGGARWAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/27005/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01146478202511 September 2025Author: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, disposing of it with a direction to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly, if so advised. The Court relied on the judgments of a Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra) and Jasjit Singh's case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and 29.07.2024 respectively. The Court noted that Section 151A of the Act, read with the notification dated 29.03.2022, clearly indicates that the scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148A and notice under Section 148. The Court reiterated the settled proposition of law that assessment proceedings commence from the issuance of the show cause notice and that the introduction of faceless assessment would be defeated if the show cause notice under Section 148 is issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The Court emphasized that circulars, office memorandums, and letters issued by the Board or other authorities cannot override statutory provisions, and the language of Section 144B and 151A, read with the notification, is lucid. Therefore, the issuance of the notice by an authority other than the NFAC was found to be without jurisdiction.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Naresh Aggarwal, challenged a notice dated 31.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2020-2021. The petitioner contended that the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice, citing a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 which purportedly vested the exclusive power to issue such notices in the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The petitioner also stated that an appeal on this issue was pending before the Appellate Authority. The respondents, the Income Tax Department, were represented by senior standing counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Issuing Authority had the jurisdiction to issue a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in light of the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which allegedly vests exclusive power in the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC)? (Question of law) Assessee's contentions: - The Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148. - The CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which enumerates the exclusive power of the NFAC to issue notices under Section 148, governs the present case. - The issue is covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509 of 2023). - An appeal on this issue is pending before the Appellate Authority. Revenue's contentions: - The revenue's counsel did not dispute the issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH

Sr. No.124 Naresh Aggarwal Deputy Commissio Chandigarh and oth

CORAM : HON

HON

Present : Mr. B

Mr. Y Mr. V Mr. V for th

DEEPAK SIBAL, J

1.

Chall under Section 148 order dated 01.03.2 2020-2021, on the g in view of circular specifically enume exclusive power to 2. Learn present writ petitio Court in the cases o CWP No. 15745-20 vs. Union of India decided on 29.07.2 petitioner has prefer H COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYA

Versus ner of Income Tax, hers

'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIB 'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BAN B. M. Monga, Advocate, for the pet Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Co Vidul Kapoor, Junior Sanding Coun Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Co he Income Tax Department. * * * * *

J. (Oral) enge in the present petition is to of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (fo 2024 and all consequential proce ground that Issuing Authority had r/notification dated 29.03.2022 of CWP-27005-2025 Date of decision : 11.09.2025

.…. Petitioner

..... Respondents BAL NERJI titioner. ounsel, with nsel and unsel, notice dated 31.03.2023 issued or short ‘Act 1961’), assessment eedings for the Assessment year no juri iction to issue the same, the CBDT, wherein, it has been Assessment Centre (NFAC) has the Act, 1961. ds that the issue involved in the by a Co-ordinate Bench of this on of India and others, passed in d on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh 023 and other connected matters), itioner has further submitted that g before Appellate Authority. SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.09.16 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

CWP-27005-2025

3.

Learn same.

4.

We h their able assistance

5.

A Co (supra) and Jasjit S raised in the prese procedure as laid d Relevant portion o (supra) reads as und "1 ass we 15 14 co int Se he dep ins sta no da lan ins

6.

As ap Authority, this writ to decide the same 19.07.2024 and Jas

11.09.

2025 shamsher

[ 2 ] ned counsel appearing for respon have heard learned counsel for the e. o-ordinate Bench of this Court in Singh's case (supra), allowed the w ent writ petition, by granting liber down under the Act, 1961 and pro of decision dated 19.07.2024 in der:-

5.

From the perusal of Section 151A, it i sessment is applicable from the stage of s ell as 148A. Clause 3(b) of notification d 51A clearly provides that scheme would

48.

Even otherwise, it is a settled proposit mmence from the stage of issuance o troduction of faceless assessment would ction 148 is issued by Juri ictional A avily placing reliance upon office partmental authorities. It is axiomatic structions and letters issued by Board o atutory provisions. The circulars are bin ot bound by circulars. The mandate of Sec ated 29.03.2022 issued thereunder is qui nguage of statutory provisions, thus, struction issued by Board or any other au ppeal in the present proceedings t petition is disposed of with a dire e in terms of Jatinder Singh Bh sjit Singh's case (supra), decided o

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No

ndents has also not disputed the parties and perused the file with Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case writ petitions on the same issue, as rty to the revenue to follow the oceed accordingly, if so advised. Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case is quite evident that scheme of faceless show cause notice under Section 148 as dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section be applicable to notice under Section tion of law that assessment proceedings of show cause notice. The object of be defeated if show cause notice under ssessing Officer. The respondents are memorandum and letter issued by c in tax jurisprudence that circulars, or any other authority cannot override nding upon authorities and Courts are ction 144B, 151A read with notification ite lucid. There is no ambiguity in the office memorandum or any other uthority cannot be relied upon." is pending before the Appellate ection to the Appellate Authority angu's case (supra), decided on n 29.07.2024. [DEEPAK SIBAL] JUDGE [LAPITA BANERJI] JUDGE o o

SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.09.16 12:25 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 →