FAKEERA SINGH vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/33884/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01176241202416 December 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 08.08.2024, the order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 31.08.2024, and the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, dated 31.08.2024, along with consequential proceedings. The Court held that circulars or instructions issued by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or render them obsolete. It reiterated the principle that legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly. The Court found that by exercising powers under Sections 119 and 120, and Section 144B(7 & 8) of the Act, authorities cannot usurp legal provisions to their convenience, causing hardship. Instructions and circulars can only supplement statutory provisions. Therefore, notices and proceedings initiated without conducting faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B were found to be contrary to the Act and set aside for want of jurisdiction. The revenue was granted liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act if advised.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Fakeera Singh, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh challenging notices and an order issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents are the Union of India and others (revenue). The petitioner argued that the proceedings were initiated without conducting a faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act. The High Court noted that similar issues had been decided in previous cases, specifically CWP No.21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India) and CWP No.15745 of 2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India). The impugned notices were dated 08.08.2024 and 31.08.2024, and an order was dated 31.08.2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued by the JAO under Section 148A(b) and Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the order issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act, are valid when faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act was not conducted. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the proceedings initiated by the JAO were contrary to the provisions of the Act, specifically that faceless assessment under Section 144B was not conducted, leading to a lack of jurisdiction. The petitioner relied on the High Court's decision in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, accepted notice. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the revenue beyond accepting notice and the possibility of distinguishing the case. However, the High Court noted that the revenue suggested a different view from what was held in the cited coordinate bench decisions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 119,Section 120,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 148A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-33884-2024 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 135 CWP-33884-2024

Decided on : 16.12.2024 Fakeera Singh . . . Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Manpreet S. Kanda, Advocate and Mr. L.C. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondent(s) – revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

, J. (Oral) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel, accepts notice for the respondents - revenue. 3. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) held as under: “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having JAWALA RAM 2024.12.17 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-33884-2024 - 2 - financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 19. The respondents-revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” JAWALA RAM 2024.12.17 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-33884-2024 - 3 - 4. Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 08.08.2024, order issued u/s 148A(d) of the Act, dated 31.08.2024 and notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, dated 31.08.2024, as well as consequential proceedings are set aside. 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE December 16, 2024 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2024.12.17 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

More judgments on Section 119

All 707 judgments and leading authorities on Section 119 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →