R P OVERSEAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
CWP/34123/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01175276202417 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 circulars or instructions issued by the Board cannot override statutory provisions or render them otiose. Legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961, as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot usurp legal provisions for their own satisfaction and convenience, causing hardship and confusion to assessees. Instructions and circulars can only supplement statutory provisions for implementation. Therefore, notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961, and proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting faceless assessment under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961. Consequently, the notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024, and 30.03.2023, 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 Section 148 and proceed accordingly. The writ petition was allowed, and interim orders were merged with the final order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, R.P. Overseas, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The case involves the assessment year(s) not explicitly stated but pertains to notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings. The challenge is to notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024, and 30.03.2023, and an order dated 30.03.2023. The procedural history indicates that the High Court has previously dealt with similar issues in connected writ petitions, specifically CWP No. 509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others) decided on 29.07.2024, and CWP No. 745 of 2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others) decided on 19.07.2024. The revenue is represented by Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether notices issued by the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings initiated without conducting a faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, are contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961, and thus liable to be set aside for want of jurisdiction? Assessee's Contention: The assessee implicitly argues that the notices and proceedings are invalid due to non-compliance with Section 144B, leading to a lack of jurisdiction. The assessee relies on the Coordinate Bench's decisions in Jasjit Singh (supra) and Jatinder Singh Bhangu (supra). Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel accepts notice and acknowledges that the issue has been finally examined and concluded by this Court in the aforementioned connected writ petitions. The revenue does not appear to have raised any distinct arguments against the assessee's position in this specific petition, deferring to the prior judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-34123-202

173

IN TH R.P. Overseas Income Tax O CORAM: H

H Present: M

M f (

SANJEEV P

1.

Notice 2. Ms. Ga of respo 3. Both th petition No.215 decided No.157 and oth held as 24

HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR

s Vs.

Officer and another **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN **** Mr. Nitin Kanwar, Advocate for Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Stan for respondents/revenue. (through video conferencing) **** 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: Page 1 of 3 AB AND HARYANA AT RH CWP-34123-2024 Date of Decision: 17.12.2024 . . . . Petitioner . . . . Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH the petitioner. nding Counsel ) 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 4

r s f t P , P a ) RASHMI 2024.12.18 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-34123-202

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

“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. Page 2 of 3 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

RASHMI 2024.12.18 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-34123-202

a t i w 4. Keepin terms. mutand Jurisdic 31.08.2 5. All pen 17.12. 2024 rashmi 1. Whethe 2. Whethe 24

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. Ac ctional Assessing Officer 2024(P-1) as well as the consequ nding applications also stand disp

(SANJ r speaking/reasoned?

Y r reportable?

Y Page 3 of 3 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 ccordingly, notice issued by under Section 148 dated uential proceedings are set aside. posed of accordingly. JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No

d s y d RASHMI 2024.12.18 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity 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 →