AYESHA KANG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CWP/25489/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01133096202404 October 2024Author: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that instructions issued by the Board, including those related to faceless assessments, cannot override statutory provisions or render them otiose or obsolete. The Court affirmed the view taken by a Coordinate Bench that legislative enactments must be followed mandatorily. The Court found that by exercising powers under Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), revenue authorities cannot usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. Consequently, notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, and the subsequent faceless assessment proceedings initiated without conducting personal hearings, were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act. The Court set aside the impugned notice dated March 14, 2024, and all consequential proceedings for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, if so advised. The writ petition was allowed, and interim orders were merged with the final order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ayesha Kang, filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated March 14, 2024, and consequential proceedings. The respondent is the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh considered this petition alongside similar matters, specifically CWP No. 21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) and CWP No. 15745 of 2023 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others), which were decided on July 19, 2024, and July 9, 2024, respectively. The core issue revolved around the validity of faceless assessment proceedings initiated without conducting personal hearings.

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 personal hearings are valid, considering the instructions issued by the JAO dated February 28, 2023, March 16, 2023, March 20, 2023, March 30, 2023, and April 30, 2023? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the faceless assessment proceedings, particularly those initiated under Section 148 without personal hearings, were contrary to the provisions of the Act and caused hardship and confusion. The petitioner relied on the Coordinate Bench's decisions in Jasjit Singh and Jatinder Singh Bhangu. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel, accepted notice and did not present any arguments against the Coordinate Bench's established view. The judgment notes that both counsel were 'ad idem' that the issue had been concluded by previous judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

106 IN TH Ayesha Kang

Assistant Com

CORAM: H

H

Present: M

M f

* SANJEEV PR

1.

N

2.

M behalf of the r

3.

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

C i o HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of

V/s mmissioner of Income Tax

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALO

Mr. Ekakshra Mahajan, Advocat Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Stand for the respondent-Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Stan respondent-Income Tax Departm 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 S “16. We are in agreement with Coordinate Bench and hold t nstructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t AB AND HARYANA AT RH 25489-2024 (O&M) f Decision:04.10.2024

..…...Petitioner

…......Respondent NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA OK JAIN e for the petitioner. ding Counsel Department. nding Counsel, accepts notice on ment. 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 r

t n e P , f , PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-25489-2

o 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 2024 (O&M) obsolete. Legislative enactmen mplications 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 mplementation.

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 found 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.” nts having financial 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 d 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 PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-25489-2

4.

K aforesaid term mutandis to th Assessing O consequential

5.

A

October 04, 2 Parul

Whether speak Whether Repor 2024 (O&M) Keeping in view above, we a ms. The observations and order p he present case. Accordingly, no fficer u/s 148 dated 14.03.2 l proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV 2024

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

:

Y allow this Writ Petition in the passed above shall apply mutatis otice issued by the Jurisdictional 2024 (Annexure P-1) and all nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

[ALOK JAIN] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No e s l l PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity 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 →