MANJU GUPTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/4892/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01028836202520 February 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) was invalid, following the established precedent of identical issues decided by a Co-ordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). The Court reasoned that after the introduction of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the Act, such notices cannot be issued by the JAO. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned notice dated 26.03.2024. The petition was disposed of in terms of the aforementioned judgments, with liberty to the respondent/Revenue to follow the prescribed procedure under the 1961 Act and proceed accordingly. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Manju Gupta, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh challenging a notice dated 26.03.2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2020-2021. The petitioner argued that the notice was invalid because it was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after the introduction of faceless assessment provisions under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the Act. The Revenue, represented by Sr. Standing Counsel, did not dispute the factual position presented by the petitioner.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) after the introduction of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the Act? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the impugned notice dated 26.03.2024, issued under Section 148 of the 1961 Act, was invalid as it was issued by the JAO, which is impermissible post the introduction of faceless assessment provisions. The petitioner relied on the judgments of a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court in CWP No. 15745-2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others) and CWP No. 21509-2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others). Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the factual position was not disputed by the Revenue. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities by the Revenue are recorded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151A,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP No.4892 of 2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4892 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision :20.02.2025 Manju Gupta ......Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Ludhiana and others ...... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Present : Mr. Yash Gilhotra, Advocate and Mr. Hunny Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner. ARUN PALLI, J.

(Oral)

: A Certiorari is prayed for, to quash the impugned notice dated 26.03.2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘1961 Act’), and all consequential proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter in issue is squarely covered by an order and judgment, rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 15745-2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024), as also in CWP No. 21509-2023 (Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024). Served with the advance copy of the petition, Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents, is present in Court. The factual position, as set out above, is not disputed. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. MANOJ KUMAR 2025.02.21 10:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP No.4892 of 2025 (O&M) 2

As indicated earlier, the petitioner has assailed the notice dated 26.03.2024, issued under Section 148 of the 1961 Act, as regards the assessment year 2020-2021. For, post introduction of the concept of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B of the 1961 Act, notice under Section 148 of the 1961 Act cannot be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). An identical issue was examined by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra), and upon thorough analysis of the matter, the notice(s) issued by the JAO were quashed and the petition(s) filed by the assessee(s) were allowed. But, with liberty to the respondent/Revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the 1961 Act and proceed accordingly. In the wake of the above and as prayed by learned counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) JUDGE 20.02.2025 Manoj Bhutani Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2025.02.21 10:34 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity 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 →