DES RAJ vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/23100/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01121908202411 September 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that instructions issued by the Board (referring to administrative instructions) cannot override statutory provisions, nor can they be issued to make statutory provisions obsolete. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly. The court found that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings initiated thereafter, without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B, were contrary to the provisions of the Act. Consequently, the notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2023, 30.03.2023, and 20.03.2024, along with the order dated 24.03.2024, were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act and proceed accordingly, if so advised. The operative direction was to allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned notices and order.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, identified as the assessee, challenged notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings, including an order dated 24.03.2024 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated but relate to reassessment proceedings. The challenge is to the validity of these notices and proceedings, particularly in light of faceless assessment procedures. The case was heard by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Department, accepted notice. The court noted that similar issues had been decided by coordinate benches in prior cases.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings, including those conducted under Section 144B, are valid when they deviate from or are contrary to the statutory provisions and the faceless assessment scheme envisaged by the Act, turning on the interplay between statutory provisions and administrative instructions/circulars. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the notices and proceedings were invalid because they were issued without conducting faceless assessment as mandated by Section 144B of the Act and were contrary to the statutory provisions. They relied on the principle that administrative instructions cannot override statutory provisions. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, accepted notice and did not present a separate argument. However, the judgment references a previous decision where the revenue's counsel suggested distinguishing or taking a different view, which the court ultimately did not accept.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

113 IN TH DES RAJ

UNION OF IN

CORAM: H

Present: M

M f

* SANJEEV PR

1.

N 2. M on behalf of th 3. B present petitio No.21509 of decided on 29 2024 titled a decided on 19

C i o o i m HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of

V NDIA AND OTHERS

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ Mr. Nazuk Singhal, Advocate an Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocate, Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Stan Ms. Samdesha Kaur, Advocate for the respondent/Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior St he respondents/Income Tax Dep 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 Si “16. We are in agreement with Coordinate Bench and hold t instructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t obsolete. Legislative enactmen implications are required to be mandatorily. By exercising the AB AND HARYANA AT RH 23100-2024 (O&M) f Decision:11.09.2024

..…...Petitioners (s) V/s. …......Respondent(s) NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH nd for the petitioner. nding Counsel, with Department. tanding Counsel, accepts notice partment. 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 nts having financial e followed strictly and powers contained in e e P , f , Suresh Kumar 2024.09.11 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-23100-202

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 4. K aforesaid term mutandis to 024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3

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 implementation. 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 foun 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.” Keeping in view above, we a ms. The observations and order p the present case. Accordin 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 nd 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 allow this Writ Petition in the passed above shall apply mutatis ngly, notices issued by the e s e Suresh Kumar 2024.09.11 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-23100-202

Jurisdictional 1961 dated 24 aside. 5. A

September 1 Ess Kay

Whether speak Whether Repor 024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3

Assessing Officer under Sectio 4.03.2024 (Annexure P-4) and co All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV 1, 2024 [SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

Y on 148 of the Income Tax Act, onsequential proceedings are set nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No , t Suresh Kumar 2024.09.11 16:48 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 →