AMARINDER SINGH (SINCE DECEASED )THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/4752/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01027526202520 February 2025Author: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issue was squarely covered by previous judgments of its Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh. In those cases, notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 were quashed, and the petitions were allowed. The reasoning was that post-introduction of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B, the JAO lacks the authority to issue such notices. The ratio decidendi is that the procedural changes brought about by faceless assessment mandate that notices under Section 148 cannot be issued by the JAO. The Court disposed of the present petition in terms of the aforementioned judgments, quashing the notice and consequential proceedings, with liberty to the Revenue to follow the prescribed procedure under the Act. No specific amount in dispute was recorded.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Amarinder Singh (since deceased) through his Legal Heir, challenged a notice dated 27.03.2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2020-21. The petitioner argued that after the introduction of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the Act, a notice under Section 148 cannot be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). The respondents, represented by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Fatehabad, and others, did not dispute the factual position. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana was considering a writ petition seeking certiorari to quash the said notice and consequential proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2020-21 can be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after the introduction of faceless assessment provisions under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the 1961 Act? (Question of law). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that such a notice issued by the JAO is invalid post-introduction of faceless assessment, citing judgments in CWP No. 15745-2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others) and CWP No. 21509-2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue's side regarding this issue. However, they were served with advance notice and appeared through virtual mode.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151A,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-4752-2025

Date of decision: 20.02.2025

Amarinder Singh (Since Deceased) through his Legal Heir

...Petitioner

Versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Fatehabad at Income Tax Office and others

….Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA

Present: Mr. Yash Gilhotra, Advocate, and Mr. Mukul Panpher, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

****

ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral)

A Certiorari is prayed for, to quash the impugned notice dated 27.03.2024 (P-4), issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘1961 Act’), and all consequential proceedings.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, at the outset, that the matter in issue is squarely covered by an order and judgment, rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 15745-2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024), as also in CWP No. 21509-2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024).

Served with the advance copy of the petition, Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, learned Senior Standing Counsel, along with Ms. V.Vedika Rao, Advocate, for the respondents, is present through virtual mode. The factual position, as set out above, is not disputed.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

As indicated earlier, the petitioner has assailed the notice dated 27.03.2024 (P-4), issued under Section 148 of the 1961 Act, as regards the assessment year 2020-21. For, post introduction of the AMIT KUMAR 2025.02.21 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

-2-

concept of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the 1961 Act, notice under Section 148 of the 1961 Act cannot be issued by the Juri ictional Assessing Officer (JAO).

An identical issue was examined by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra), and upon thorough analysis of the matter, the notice(s) issued by the JAO were quashed and the petition(s) filed by the assessee(s) were allowed. But, with liberty to the respondent/Revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the 1961 Act and proceed accordingly.

In the wake of the above, and as prayed by learned counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra).

(ARUN PALLI)

JUDGE

(DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA)

JUDGE 20.02.2025 Ak Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AMIT KUMAR 2025.02.21 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →