M/S JQR FOOTWEAR (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CWP/30244/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01153679202407 November 2024Author: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the subsequent assessment proceedings initiated without conducting the assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act and accordingly set aside for want of jurisdiction. The Court agreed with the view taken by a Coordinate Bench, which held that circulars or instructions by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or make them obsolete. Legislative enactments with financial implications are to be mandatorily followed. The Court found that the authorities cannot usurp legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. The Court stated that instructions and circulars can be issued only for supplementing statutory provisions and for their implementation. Therefore, the notice dated 29.08.2024 and all consequential proceedings were set aside. The Revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s JQR Footwear (India) Private Ltd., challenged a notice dated 29.08.2024 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the consequential assessment proceedings. The petitioner argued that these proceedings were initiated without jurisdiction. The Revenue, represented by the Income Tax Department, accepted notice. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana was considering this writ petition alongside other similar petitions, including Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, which had been decided by a Coordinate Bench on 19.07.2024 and 29.07.2024 respectively. The core issue revolved around the validity of faceless assessment proceedings initiated without proper adherence to statutory provisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent faceless assessment proceedings initiated without conducting the assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are valid and have jurisdiction. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the proceedings were initiated without jurisdiction, implying that the procedural requirements, particularly those related to faceless assessment under Section 144B, were not met. The petitioner relied on the principle that instructions by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or make them obsolete, and that legislative enactments with financial implications must be mandatorily followed. The petitioner also contended that exercising powers under Sections 119 and 120, as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), should not allow authorities to usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, accepted notice. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the Revenue, but it notes that the counsel for the Revenue did not suggest a different view from that already held by the Coordinate Bench.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 144B,Section 119,Section 120

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

124 IN TH M/S JQR F AUTHORIZED

CHIEF COMM CORAM: H

H

Present: M M f

* SANJEEV PR

1.

N

2.

M on behalf of th

3.

B present petitio No.21509 of decided on 29 2024 titled a decided on 19

C i o o HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-3 Date of FOOTWEAR (INDIA) PRIVA ED SIGNATORY SH. PATTERSO

V MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ Mr. Neeraj Goel, Advocate for th Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Senior S for the respondent-Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Senior S he respondents/Income Tax Dep Both the counsel are ad idem on stands finally examined and c f 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs 9.07.2024, and by the Coordina as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. 9.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Si “16. We are in agreement with Coordinate Bench and hold t instructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t obsolete. Legislative enactmen AB AND HARYANA AT RH 30244-2024 (O&M) f Decision:07.11.2024 VATE LTD. THROUGH ITS ON THOMAS

..…...Petitioner(s) V/s. X AND OTHERS

…......Respondent(s)

NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH he petitioner. Standing Counsel Department Standing Counsel, accepts notice partment. that the issue involved in the concluded by this Court in CWP s. Union of India and others, ate Bench in CWP No.15745 of . Union of India and others, Singh (supra) held as under: the view taken by the that such circular or not have been issued to to make them otiose or nts having financial S )

) e e P , f , Suresh Kumar 2024.11.12 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-30244 -20

i m S S a s a t a s i 1 o s w 1 C u p f o p d 3 f 1 l A 2 o p

4.

K aforesaid term 024 (O&M) implications are required to be mandatorily. By exercising the Sections 119 and 120 of the A Section 144B (7 & 8), the a allowed to usurp the legal pro satisfaction and convenience ca assessees. It also leaves confusio taxpayers. In the opinion of th and circulars can be issued on supplementing the statutory pro implementation.

17.

In view of the aforesaid d occasion to distinguish or take suggested by the learned counse what has already been held by th

18.

Keeping in view the law Coordinate Bench (supra), notic under Section 148 of the proceedings initiated thereafter w faceless assessment as envisage of the Act, 1961, have been foun provisions of the Act, 1961 an dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.202 30.03.2023 and order dated 30. for want of jurisdiction.

19.

The respondents-revenue w liberty to follow the procedure a Act, 1961 and proceed according

20.

All the writ petitions are order passed by the Court shall present order.” Keeping in view above, we a ms. The observations and order p e followed strictly and powers contained in Act, 1961 as well as authorities cannot be ovisions to their own ausing hardship to the on in the minds of the his Court, instructions nly for the purpose of ovisions and for their discussion, there is no e a different view as el for the revenue from he Coordinate Bench. w laid down by the ces issued by the JAO Act, 1961 and the without conducting the ed under Section 144B d to be contrary to the nd accordingly notices 23, 20.03.2024 and 03.2023, are set aside would be, however, at as laid down under the gly, if so advised. allowed. The interim stand merged with the allow this Writ Petition in the passed above shall apply mutatis e s Suresh Kumar 2024.11.12 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-30244 -20

mutandis to (Annexure P- Income Tax aside.

5.

A

November 7, Ess Kay

Whether speak Whether Repor

024 (O&M) the present case. According -5) issued by the Jurisdictional A Act, 1961 and all consequenti All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV , 2024

[SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

:

Y gly, notice dated 29.08.2024 Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the ial proceedings thereof are set nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No 4 e t Suresh Kumar 2024.11.12 11:00 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 →