GURMAIL SINGH vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/32451/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01166977202402 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 notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the consequential proceedings, including faceless assessments under Section 144B, were contrary to the provisions of the Act. The Court agreed with the view taken by coordinate benches in Jasjit Singh and Jatinder Singh Bhangu. The reasoning was that circulars or instructions issued by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or make them otiose. The authorities cannot usurp legal provisions to their own satisfaction or convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. Instructions can only supplement statutory provisions for their implementation. Consequently, the notices dated 09.02.2024, 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024, and 30.03.2023, and the consequential orders were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The Revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gurmail Singh, challenged notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings, including assessment orders, before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Revenue, represented by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar, was the respondent. The core of the challenge was that these notices and proceedings were initiated without conducting a proper faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act. The High 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. 15724 of 2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India) decided on 19.07.2024. The present petition was disposed of in light of these prior decisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings, including faceless assessments under Section 144B, were contrary to the provisions of the Act, particularly concerning the procedure for assessment, and thus liable to be set aside? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Sections 148 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the notices and proceedings were initiated without adhering to the mandatory procedural requirements of the Act, specifically the faceless assessment scheme under Section 144B, leading to a lack of jurisdiction. The assessee relied on the judgments of coordinate benches in Jasjit Singh and Jatinder Singh Bhangu. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's counsel accepted notice and agreed that the issue had been finally examined and concluded by the coordinate benches. They did not present any arguments to distinguish the present case from the precedents cited by the assessee.

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-32451-202 117 IN TH GURMAIL S CHIEF COMM ANOTHER

CORAM: H

H Present: M f

SANJEEV P

1.

Notice 2. Ms. Ur respond 3. Both th petition No.215 decided No.157 24 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

INGH Vs.

MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAS **** Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Advocate ( for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standin Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing C for the respondents/Revenue. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) of motion. rvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Cou dents/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 AB AND HARYANA AT RH CWP-32451-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.12.2024 . . . . Petitioner X AMRITSAR AND . . . . Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SJIT SINGH BEDI (through VC) ng Counsel Counsel ) unsel 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

) 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-32451-202 and oth held as 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 24 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 hers, decided on 19.07.2024. Th under: “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 his Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) 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

) MOHIT GOYAL 2024.12.03 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-32451-202 3 f 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 30.03.2023 and order dated 30. for want of jurisdiction. 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 03.2023, are set aside 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 09.02.2024 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 →