DHEERAJ MANCHANDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/13737/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01076116202514 May 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 the same terms as the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others and Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others. In those cited cases, writ petitions involving similar issues were allowed, and liberty was granted to the respondents (revenue) to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly, if so advised. This implies that the impugned notice was found to be procedurally flawed, but the revenue was given an opportunity to re-issue a valid notice if they chose to do so. The specific reasoning for allowing the previous petitions, which is being applied here, likely pertains to the incorrect issuance of the Section 148 notice by the jurisdictional AO instead of the NFAC.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dheeraj Manchanda, challenged a notice dated 27.03.2024 issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Faridabad, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2020-2021. The petitioner argued that the notice was erroneously issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who lacked the authority to do so, given the National Faceless Assessment Centre's exclusive powers to issue such notices under Section 148 for faceless assessment proceedings as per the Notification dated 28/29.03.2022. The petitioner relied on previous judgments of the High Court in similar matters.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is invalid because it was issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, considering the provisions for faceless assessment proceedings and the relevant notification. Assessee's contentions: The petitioner argued that the notice was erroneously issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who lacked the jurisdiction to do so. This was in light of the National Faceless Assessment Centre's exclusive powers to issue notices under Section 148 for faceless assessment proceedings, as stipulated by the Notification dated 28/29.03.2022. The petitioner cited the decisions 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) as precedents. Revenue's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH C 141

DHEERAJ MAN

INCOME TAX

CORAM: HON

HON

Present: Mr.

Mr.

Ms.

ANUPINDER S

The (Annexure P-1) i Act, 1961 (here assessment proce

2.

Lear under Section 1 Jurisdictional As in view of the N assessment proce exclusive powers submits that the c COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARY

CWP-13737-202

DATE OF DEC

NCHANDA

Versus OFFICER WARD 1(1) FARID

N’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPI N’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the

Varun Issar, Senior Standing co Pridhi Sandhu, Senior Standing SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) petitioner has challenged issued by respondent No.1 under inafter referred to as the ‘Act eedings for Assessment Year 202 rned counsel for the petitioner su 148 of the Act, 1961 has err sessing Officer although he has Notification dated 28/29.03.202 eedings and National Faceless A s to issue notice under Section 1 coordinate Bench of this Court in YANA AT CHANDIGARH 25 ISION: 14.05.2025

… Petitioner (s) DABAD AND OTHERS

... Respondent(s) INDER SINGH GREWAL AK MANCHANDA e petitioner. ounsel for Income Tax and counsel for Income Tax.

the notice dated 27.03.2024 r Section 148 of the Income Tax t, 1961’) and all consequential 20-2021. ubmits that the impugned notice roneously been issued by the no jurisdiction to issue the same 22 which provides for faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has 148 of the Act, 1961. He further n CWP No.15745-2024 –

) 4 x l e e e s s r SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.16 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-13737-2025

-2- decided on 19.07.2024 as well as CWP No.21509-2023-Jasjit Singh Vs. Union Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No

Whether reportable

: Yes / No

SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.16 09:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →