PRIYANKA KUMARI GIRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/11547/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01064734202507 May 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgments passed by a Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024), decided on 19.07.2024, and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023), decided on 29.07.2024. In those cases, the writ petitions were allowed on similar issues, with liberty granted to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly if so advised. The reasoning is based on the precedent set by the Co-ordinate Bench, which addressed the jurisdictional issue arising from the CBDT circular. The operative direction is to dispose of the present petition in line with these precedents, implying that the impugned notices and orders are set aside, with the revenue having the option to re-initiate proceedings correctly. Any pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Priyanka Kumari Giri, challenged a notice dated 07.03.2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an assessment order dated 27.03.2025 under Section 147, a demand notice dated 27.03.2025, and a penalty show cause notice dated 27.03.2025, all pertaining to Assessment Year 2020-2021. The challenge was based on the assertion that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction due to a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which purportedly grants exclusive power to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) to issue Section 148 notices. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2, Ambala, and others, did not dispute the petitioner's contention regarding the applicability of prior judgments.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 07.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessment order dated 27.03.2025 under Section 147, the demand notice dated 27.03.2025, and the penalty show cause notice dated 27.03.2025 for AY 2020-2021 are invalid due to lack of jurisdiction of the issuing authority, in light of the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 conferring exclusive power on the NFAC to issue Section 148 notices? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the impugned notices and orders, relying on a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022 which allegedly vests exclusive power in the NFAC for issuing Section 148 notices. The petitioner cited the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023) as covering the present issue. Revenue's Contentions: The learned counsel for the Union of India did not dispute the petitioner's contentions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-11547-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 157 CWP-11547-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-07.05.2025 Priyanka Kumari Giri ....Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2, Ambala & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate Ms Mamta Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. *** SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. 1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 07.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) assessment order dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 27.03.2025 and penalty show cause notice dated 27.03.2025 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. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the Gaurav Arora 2025.05.12 14:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-11547-2025 2 whole records of the case. 5. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 07.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; assessment order dated 27.03.2025 issued under Section 147 of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 27.03.2025 and penalty show cause notice dated 27.03.2025 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. (LISA GILL)

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 07.05.2025

Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.05.12 14:17 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 →