ANJU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/32450/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01167639202402 December 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that circulars or instructions issued by the Board under Section 119 and Section 120 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot override statutory provisions or render them obsolete. Legislative enactments must be followed strictly. The Court found that the authorities, by exercising powers under Sections 119, 120, and 144B (7 & 8) of the Act, had usurped legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. The Court agreed with the view taken by coordinate benches in Jasjit Singh and Jatinder Singh Bhangu. Consequently, notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, and the consequential proceedings initiated without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B, were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961. The notices dated 28.02.2023, 20.03.2023, 16.03.2024, 28.03.2024, and the order dated 30.03.2023 were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The Revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly if so advised. All pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anju, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings. The petitioner argued that these notices and proceedings were initiated without conducting a proper faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act. The Revenue contended that the notices were valid. The Court noted that similar issues had been decided by coordinate benches in other writ petitions, specifically CWP No. 21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India) decided on 29.07.2024, and CWP No. 157745 of 2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India) decided on 19.07.2024. The amount in dispute is not specified. The procedural history involves the issuance of notices under Section 148 and the initiation of assessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings for conducting faceless assessment under Section 144B of the Act, were contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961, and issued without jurisdiction. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notices and proceedings were initiated without adhering to the mandatory requirements of faceless assessment under Section 144B, thereby rendering them without jurisdiction. The petitioner relied on the decisions of coordinate benches in Jasjit Singh and Jatinder Singh Bhangu. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, represented by Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel, argued that the notices and proceedings were valid. The judgment does not explicitly detail the Revenue's specific arguments beyond accepting notice and appearing through counsel, but it implies a defense of the validity of the notices and proceedings.

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-32450-202 116 IN TH ANJU INCOME TA

CORAM: H

H Present: M M

SANJEEV P

1.

Notice 2. Ms. Ga of respo 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

Vs.

AX OFFICER AND OTHERS **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAS **** Ms. Monika Agarwal, Advocate Mr. Ajit Kumar Jha, Advocate fo Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Stand for the respondents/Revenue. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) of motion. auri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing C ondents/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-32450-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.12.2024 . . . . Petitioner . . . . Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SJIT SINGH BEDI with or the petitioner. ding Counsel (through VC) ) Counsel accepts notice on behalf 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 s f t P , P a ) MOHIT GOYAL 2024.12.03 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-32450-202 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 2024.12.03 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-32450-202 a t i w 4. Keepin terms. mutand issued Jurisdic proceed 5. All pen

December 02, 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 28.03.2024 Income Tax Act, 1961 by s well as the consequential posed of accordingly. JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No

d s 4 y l MOHIT GOYAL 2024.12.03 15:02 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 →