TEJINDER SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/10079/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01056540202507 April 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issue raised by the petitioner was covered by previous judgments of a Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. In those cases, writ petitions were allowed on similar grounds, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the prescribed procedure under the Act if so advised. Consequently, the present writ petition was disposed of in terms of these prior judgments. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition in line with the cited precedents. No specific amount in dispute was recorded. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Tejinder Singh, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 15.03.2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an order dated 19.03.2025 under Section 147, a demand notice dated 19.03.2025 under Section 156, and a notice dated 20.03.2025 under Section 271AAC(1), all pertaining to Assessment Year 2020-2021. The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction due to a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which vests exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices with the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The revenue did not dispute this contention.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 15.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings for AY 2020-2021 are invalid on the ground that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction, in light of the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 which grants exclusive power to the NFAC to issue such notices? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The issuing authority had no jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148, as the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 specifically states that the NFAC has exclusive power for such issuances. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not dispute the assessee's contention.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 156,Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-10079-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 197

CWP-10079-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-07.04.2025 Tejinder Singh ....Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Office, Ward 6 (1), Chd. & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Nikhil Goyal and Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocates, for the petitioner. Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing counsel for the respondent. *** SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. 1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 15.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); order dated 19.03.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 19.03.2025 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; notice dated 20.03.2025 issued under Section 271 AAC (1) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509- 2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024 . 3. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same. Gaurav Arora 2025.04.09 10:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-10079-2025 2 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case. 5. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 15.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; order dated 19.03.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 19.03.2025 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; notice dated 20.03.2025 issued under Section 271 AAC (1) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021 on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, in view of the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. 6. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 7. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024 8. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 07.04.2025

Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.04.09 10:25 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 →