HARKISHAN SINGH vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/29738/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01150967202404 November 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the consequential assessment proceedings initiated without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are contrary to the provisions of the Act. The Court relied on its previous decisions in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India. The reasoning was that instructions by the Board (referring to Section 119 and 120 powers) cannot override statutory provisions or make them otiose. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed mandatorily. The Court found that the authorities cannot usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion. Therefore, the notices dated 26.03.2024, and other consequential orders, were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act if so advised. The operative direction was to allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned notice and proceedings.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Harkishan Singh (since deceased, through his legal heir Gurminder Singh), challenged a notice dated 26.03.2024 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequent assessment proceedings. The petitioner argued that the assessment proceedings were initiated without jurisdiction. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Department, accepted notice. The High Court noted that the issue was similar to previously decided cases, specifically CWP No. 21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India) and CWP No. 15745 of 2023 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India), decided on 19.07.2024 and 29.07.2024 respectively. The Court was asked to decide whether the assessment proceedings were validly initiated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent assessment proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, are valid and have jurisdiction. (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 148 and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The assessment proceedings were initiated without jurisdiction, particularly as they were not conducted through the faceless assessment mechanism mandated by Section 144B of the Act. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the Senior Standing Counsel, accepted notice. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue in the provided text.

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

114 IN TH HARKISHAN (THROUGH H

UNION OF IN

CORAM: H

Present: M M

* SANJEEV PR

1.

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

C i o o i HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-2 Date of N SINGH SINCE DECEASED HIS LEGAL HEIR GURMINDER SIN

V NDIA AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate, an Mr. Manpreet Kanda, Advocate f Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Stand for the respondent/Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Stan respondents/Income Tax Departm 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 AB AND HARYANA AT RH 29738-2024 (O&M) f Decision:04.11.2024 INGH)

..…...Petitioner(s) V/s. …......Respondent(s) NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH nd for the petitioner. ding Counsel, Department. nding Counsel, accepts notice on ment. 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 ) ) n e P , f , Suresh Kumar 2024.11.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-29738-202

m 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 024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3

mandatorily. By exercising the 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 powers contained in 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 e s Suresh Kumar 2024.11.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-29738-202

mutandis to (Annexure P- Income Tax aside. 5. A

November 4, Ess Kay

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

the present case. According -1) issued by the Jurisdictional A Act, 1961 and all consequenti All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV , 2024

[SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

Y gly, notice dated 26.03.2024 Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the ial proceedings thereof are set nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No 4 e t Suresh Kumar 2024.11.05 09:29 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 →