SUSHIL KUMAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/20363/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01112238202521 July 2025Author: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the impugned notice dated 27.03.2025, issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, was liable to be quashed. The reasoning was based on the precedent set by two coordinate benches of the same court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh. These judgments established that notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be issued through the faceless assessment procedure as stipulated by the notification dated 29.03.2022. The court quashed the notice with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the law. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sushil Kumar, challenged a notice dated 27.03.2025 issued by the respondents (Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh and others) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the notice was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, which was impermissible according to a notification dated 29.03.2022 from the Ministry of Finance, Government of India. This notification mandated that such notices be issued through faceless assessment. The petitioner relied on two previous judgments of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in support of his argument. The respondents did not dispute that the petitioner's case was covered by these prior judgments.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is valid, given the mandate for faceless assessment under the notification dated 29.03.2022 (mixed question of law and fact). Assessee's Contentions: - The impugned notice dated 27.03.2025, issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is invalid because it should have been issued through the faceless assessment procedure as per the Ministry of Finance notification dated 29.03.2022. - Relied on the High Court judgments in CWP-15745-2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others) and CWP-21509-2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others). Revenue's Contentions: - The respondents did not dispute that the petitioner's case was covered in his favour by the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.144

CWP-20363-2025 Date of decision : 21.07.2025

Sushil Kumar

.…. Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh and others

..... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

Present : Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner (through V.C.).

Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel, with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel, for the Income Tax Department.

* * * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

1.

Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 27.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued to the petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Juri ictional Assessing Officer which could have not been done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2) issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment.

2.

In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:- (i) CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024; and (ii) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.07.29 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

CWP-20363-2025

[ 2 ]

aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra).

4.

In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra), the impugned notice dated 27.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Juri ictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

5.

The petition is allowed in the above terms.

[DEEPAK SIBAL]

JUDGE

21.07.

2025

[LAPITA BANERJI] shamsher

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.07.29 09:55 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 →