JAGESH KUMAR KHAITAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/14921/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01082814202507 July 2025Author: MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the petition in terms similar to the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others and Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others. In those cases, writ petitions challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were allowed on the ground that the notices were issued by officers lacking jurisdiction under the faceless assessment scheme. The Coordinate Bench had granted liberty to the respondents to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly if so advised. Therefore, the present petition was disposed of on the same basis, implying that the impugned notice was likely to be quashed or set aside, with the revenue permitted to issue a fresh notice if they complied with the correct procedure. The specific reasoning for the decision in this particular case is derived from the precedent set by the cited cases.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Jagesh Kumar Khaitan, challenged a notice dated March 21, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Chandigarh. This notice initiated assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2018-2019. The petitioner argued that the notice was erroneously issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who lacked the authority to do so. This was in light of the Notification dated March 28/29, 2022, which mandates that the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive powers to issue such notices under Section 148, as part of the faceless assessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated March 21, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is invalid due to lack of jurisdiction, considering the provisions of the Notification dated March 28/29, 2022, pertaining to faceless assessment proceedings. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the impugned notice was erroneously issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who had no jurisdiction. This is because the Notification dated March 28/29, 2022, vests exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148 with the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) under the faceless assessment regime. The petitioner relied on the decisions of the Coordinate Bench of this Court 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), where similar writ petitions were allowed, granting liberty to the respondents to follow the prescribed procedure. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-14921-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 110 CWP-14921-2025 Date of decision : 07.07.2025 Jagesh Kumar Khaitan

... Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 2, Chandigarh and others

... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present:- Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate and Mr. Bhuvan Khurana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent/Income Tax Department. *** Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. (Oral) The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by respondent No.1 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1961’) and all consequential assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 has erroneously been issued by the Juri ictional Assessing Officer although he has no juri iction to issue the same in view of the Notification dated 28/29.03.2022 which provides for faceless assessment proceedings and National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive powers to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, SONIA GUGNANI 2025.07.08 09.02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-14921-2025 -2- 1961. He further submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.15745-2024 -Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 as well as CWP No.21509-2023- Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2025.07.08 09.02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 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 →