BHAVYA CHAWLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/24991/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01135590202527 August 2025Author: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, while acknowledging that an appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority, disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the pending appeal in terms of the judgments passed by a Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (decided on July 19, 2024) and Jasjit Singh's case (decided on July 29, 2024). These prior judgments had allowed writ petitions on similar issues, holding that the scheme of faceless assessment, as applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148A and 148, mandates the NFAC to issue such notices. The Court noted that while circulars/instructions cannot override statutory provisions, the mandate of Section 144B and 151A read with the notification dated March 29, 2022, was lucid, and the object of faceless assessment would be defeated if the jurisdictional Assessing Officer issued the notice. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, if so advised.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Bhavya Chawla, challenged a notice dated March 28, 2023, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-2017, along with subsequent proceedings. The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction due to a CBDT circular dated March 29, 2022, which vests exclusive power to issue such notices with the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The petitioner also noted that an appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority. The Income Tax Department did not dispute the petitioner's contentions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated March 28, 2023, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-2017, and subsequent proceedings are liable to be set aside on the ground that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction in view of the CBDT circular dated March 29, 2022, which mandates that the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive power to issue such notices? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 148 and Section 151A of the Act, 1961, and CBDT notification dated March 29, 2022). Assessee's contention: The issuing authority lacked jurisdiction as per the CBDT circular dated March 29, 2022, which grants exclusive power to the NFAC to issue notices under Section 148. Reliance was placed on judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not dispute the petitioner's contentions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151A,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-24991 of 2025 (O&M)

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-24991 of 2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 27.08.2025

Bhavya Chawla

..... Petitioner

Versus

Income Tax Officer 1(1), Faridabad and others

..... Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present: Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Varun Issar, Advocate

for respondents-Income Tax Department.

**** LISA GILL, J.

1.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that notice dated 28.03.2023, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’), for the Assessment Year 2016-2017 and all subsequent proceedings, should be set aside 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 the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by judgment passed by a Co-ordinate and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided Omkar Singh 2025.09.01 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-24991 of 2025 (O&M)

-2- 21509- 2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for respondent-Income Tax has also not disputed the same.

4.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the file with their able assistance.

5.

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 Omkar Singh 2025.09.01 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-24991 of 2025 (O&M)

-3- by circulars. The mandate of Section 144B, 151A readwith notification 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.”

6.

As appeal in the present proceedings is pending before the Appellate Authority, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the same 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. (LISA GILL)

JUDGE

(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) 27.08.2025

JUDGE ‘om’

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No Omkar Singh 2025.09.01 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 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 →