RAJESH KUMAR KATYAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/18025/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01100629202504 July 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that a Co-ordinate Bench had previously allowed writ petitions on the same issue in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the prescribed procedure. Since an appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority in the present case, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the petitioner's appeal in terms of the aforementioned judgments. The operative direction was to decide the pending appeal in accordance with the precedents.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Katyal, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 28.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an assessment order dated 12.03.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 156 of the Act, 1961, and all consequential actions for Assessment Year 2019-2020. 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 in the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The petitioner also stated that an appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority. The revenue did not dispute the petitioner's contentions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 28.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the consequential assessment order dated 12.03.2024 are without jurisdiction, in light of the CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022. Assessee's contentions: 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 grants exclusive power to the NFAC. The petitioner has also preferred an appeal which is pending before the Appellate Authority. Revenue's contentions: The revenue did not dispute the petitioner's contentions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-18025-2025 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 116

CWP-18025-2025 Date of decision: 04.07.2025 Rajesh Kumar Katyal ...Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ambala and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. B.M. Monga, Mr. Rohit Kaura, Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocates 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 28.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); assessment order dated 12.03.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 156 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020. 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. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority. 3. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not Gaurav Arora 2025.07.10 15:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-18025-2025 [2] disputed the same. 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 28.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; assessment order dated 12.03.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 156 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020., 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. Since in the present case, the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner, in terms of the judgments mentioned above. 8. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)

JUDGE JUDGE 04.07.2025 Gaurav Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.07.10 15:06 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 →