M/S S N REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE I AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/15741/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01086856202528 May 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, disposing of it in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. These prior judgments had allowed similar writ petitions on the same issue. The reasoning was that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the Section 148 notice, consistent with the CBDT circular. The Court granted liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly, if so advised. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition in terms of the cited precedents, with liberty to the revenue to re-initiate proceedings if they chose to follow the correct procedure.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s S.N. Realtors Pvt. Ltd., challenged a notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2014-2015. The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice. This was based on a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which purportedly grants exclusive power to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) to issue such notices. The revenue, represented by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, did not dispute this contention. The High Court considered the submissions and the records.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2014-2015 is invalid due to lack of jurisdiction of the issuing authority, in light of the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and CBDT Circular dated 29.03.2022). Assessee's Contention: The issuing authority had no jurisdiction to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, as per the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which vests exclusive power in the NFAC. The petitioner relied on the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not dispute the assessee's contention.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-15741-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 160 CWP-15741-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-28.05.2025 M/s S.N. Realtors Pvt. Ltd ....Petitioner Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle I, Gurugram & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Mr. Puneet Aggarwal, Mr. Yuvraj Singh, Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing counsel for the respondents. *** SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. 1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) and all consequential actions, for AY 2014-2015. 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 whole records of the case. Sonia Arora 2025.05.31 16:28 I agree to specified portions of this document

CWP-15741-2025 2 5. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2014-2015 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 28.05.2025

Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Sonia Arora 2025.05.31 16:28 I agree to specified portions 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 →