SAVITA KAPILA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/32708/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01167162202404 December 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 consequential proceedings initiated under Section 144B, were contrary to the provisions of the Act and were found to be without jurisdiction. 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 (circulars) cannot override statutory provisions or make them otiose. Financial implications require mandatory adherence to statutory provisions. Authorities cannot usurp legal provisions for their convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. The court reiterated that instructions and circulars can only supplement statutory provisions for implementation. Consequently, the notices dated 28.03.2024, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2023, and 30.03.2023, along with all consequential proceedings, were set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, if so advised.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Dr. Savita Kapila, challenged notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings initiated under the faceless assessment scheme, specifically Section 144B. The petitioner argued that these notices and proceedings were invalid. The Income Tax Department, represented by the respondents, accepted notice. The High Court noted that similar issues had been decided by coordinate benches in previous writ petitions, specifically Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, both decided on July 19, 2024. The court was informed that the present petition's issues were concluded by these prior judgments.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings initiated under Section 144B of the Act, are valid when they are found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act and its circulars, and are issued without jurisdiction. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the notices and subsequent proceedings were invalid and liable to be set aside. The petitioner relied on the decisions of coordinate benches in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, accepted notice and agreed that the issue had been concluded by previous judgments of the High Court. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue beyond this agreement.

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

107-5 IN TH DR. SAVITA K

UNION OF IN

CORAM: H

Present: M M M 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 HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

CWP-3 Date of KAPILA CARE OF ABHILASH K

V NDIA AND OTHERS

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ

Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Cajla, Advocate for t Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Stan Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standi Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-Income Tax D ***** RAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, 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 AB AND HARYANA AT RH 32708-2024 (O&M) f Decision:04.12.2024 KAPILA

..…...Petitioner(s) V/s. …......Respondent(s) NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH e for the petitioner. nding Counsel, with ing Counsel and 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 e P , f , Suresh Kumar 2024.12.09 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-32708-202

i 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

implications 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 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 e 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 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 2024.12.09 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-32708-202

mutandis to (Annexures P of the Income set aside. 5. A

December 4, Ess Kay

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

the present case. According P-1 to P-3) issued by the Jurisdic e Tax Act, 1961 and all conseq All pending applications also stan [SANJEEV 2024

[SAN

king / reasoned :

Y rtable

Y gly, notices dated 28.03.2024 ctional Assessing Officer u/s 148 quential proceedings thereof are nd disposed of accordingly.

V PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE

NJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No 4 8 e Suresh Kumar 2024.12.09 10:31 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 →