GURPREET SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/30714/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01157420202414 November 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that circulars or instructions issued by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or make them obsolete. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly and mandatorily. The authorities cannot usurp legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. Powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), do not permit this. Therefore, notices issued under Section 148 of the Act and the subsequent faceless assessment proceedings initiated under Section 144B were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act. The Tribunal, following the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench in Jasjit Singh (supra), set aside the notices dated 15.03.2024, 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024, 30.03.2023, and the order dated 30.03.2023, for want of jurisdiction. The Revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act and proceed accordingly, if advised. All pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gurpreet Singh, filed a writ petition challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings. The Revenue, represented by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3), Jalandhar, accepted notice. The High Court noted that the issue was identical to previously decided cases: CWP No. 215 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) decided on July 29, 2024, and CWP No. 157 of 2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others) decided on July 19, 2024. These earlier judgments had addressed the validity of faceless assessment proceedings initiated under Section 144B of the Act, particularly concerning notices issued under Section 148.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent faceless assessment proceedings initiated under Section 144B of the Act, are valid when they are contrary to the provisions of the Act and the instructions issued by the Board, particularly concerning the usurpation of legal provisions by authorities for their convenience and causing hardship to assessees? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on Sections 148 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner implicitly relies on the arguments and findings in the cited cases (Jasjit Singh and Jatinder Singh Bhangu) which held such proceedings to be invalid. The petitioner's counsel accepted that the issue was covered by these precedents. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's counsel accepted notice and did not present any distinct arguments, agreeing that the matter was concluded by the aforementioned judgments of the Coordinate Bench.

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

CWP-30714-202 109 IN TH GURPREET INCOME TA

CORAM: H

H Present: M

SANJEEV P

1.

Notice 2. Mr. Ra respond 3. Both th petition No.215 decided No.157 and oth held as 24 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

SINGH Vs.

AX OFFICER, WARD 4(3), JAL **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN **** Mr. Kushagra Mahajan, Advocat Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing for the respondent/Revenue. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) of motion. anvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Coun dent/Revenue. he counsel are ad idem that the n stands finally examined and co 509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh d on 29.07.2024, and by the 745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Sin hers, decided on 19.07.2024. Th under: AB AND HARYANA AT RH CWP-30714-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.11.2024 . . . . Petitioner LANDHAR . . . . Respondent NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH te for the petitioner. g Counsel ) nsel accepts notice on behalf of e issue involved in the present oncluded by this Court in CWP h vs. Union of India and others, e Coordinate Bench in CWP ngh Bhangu vs. Union of India his Court in Jasjit Singh (supra)

) 4 r t f t P , P a ) MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.18 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-30714-202 b i o o i m S S a s a t a s i n s w C u i a A p d 3 f 24 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 “16. We are in agreemen by the Coordinate Bench and hol nstructions by the Board could n override statutory provisions or t obsolete. Legislative enactmen mplications are required to be 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 mplementation. 17. In view of the aforesa no occasion to distinguish or ta suggested by the learned counse what has already been held by th 18. Keeping in view the Coordinate Bench (supra), notic under Section 148 of the Act, 196 nitiated thereafter without con assessment as envisaged under Act, 1961, have been found to provisions of the Act, 1961 an dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.202 30.03.2023 and order dated 30. for want of jurisdiction. nt with the view taken ld that such circular or not have been issued to to make them otiose or nts having financial followed strictly and 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 aid discussion, there is ake a different view as el for the revenue from he Coordinate Bench. law laid down by the ces issued by the JAO 61 and the proceedings nducting the faceless r Section 144B of the o be contrary to the d accordingly notices 23, 20.03.2024 and 03.2023, are set aside

MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.18 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-30714-202 a t i w 4. Keepin terms. mutand issued Jurisdic proceed 5. All pen

November 14, Mohit goyal 1. Whethe 2. Whethe 24 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 19. The respondents-reven at liberty to follow the procedur the Act, 1961 and proceed accord 20. All the writ petition nterim order passed by the Cou with the present order.”

ng in view above, we allow this The observations and order pa dis to the present case. Accord under Section 148 of the ctional Assessing Officer as dings are set aside. nding applications also stand disp

(SANJ , 2024 r speaking/reasoned?

Y r reportable?

Y nue would be, however, re as laid down under dingly, if so advised. ns are allowed. The urt shall stand merged s Writ Petition in the aforesaid assed above shall apply mutatis dingly, notice dated 15.03.2024 Income Tax Act, 1961 by s well as the consequential posed of accordingly. JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No

d s 4 y l MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.18 14:50 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 →