RAM ASRA GOYAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/18964/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01102833202510 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 27.06.2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, was invalid. This decision was based on the principle established in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh, which were relied upon by the petitioner. The Court found that the respondents did not contest the applicability of these precedents. Consequently, the notice was quashed. The respondents were granted liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. No other issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ram Asra Goyal Education and Research Society, challenged a notice dated 27.06.2025 issued 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 mandating faceless assessment. The respondents, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, Chandigarh and others, did not dispute that the petitioner's case was covered by previous judgments of the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is valid when a notification mandates faceless assessment? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The impugned notice is invalid as it was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, contrary to the notification dated 29.03.2022 which requires faceless assessment. Reliance was placed on CWP-15745-2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India) and CWP-21509-2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India). Revenue's contention: The respondents did not dispute the assessee's submission and conceded that the case was covered by 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.124

CWP-18964-2025 Date of decision : 10.07.2025

Ram Asra Goyal Education and Research Society

.…. Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, Chandigarh and others

..... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

Present : Mr. V. B. Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

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

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

1.

Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 27.06.2025 (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 SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.07.14 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

CWP-18964-2025

[ 2 ]

case of the petitioner is covered in its favour by the law laid down through the 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 27.06.2025 (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

10.07.

2025

[LAPITA BANERJI] shamsher

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SHAMSHER SINGH 2025.07.14 16:54 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 →