KRISHAN KUMAR AND SONS HUF vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
CWP/5829/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01033139202428 August 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, disposing of it in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case and Jasjit Singh's case. These previous judgments had allowed writ petitions on similar issues, granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and proceed accordingly if so advised. The Court noted that the scheme of faceless assessment, applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148A, is evident from Section 151A and relevant notifications. The Court reiterated that departmental circulars or letters cannot override statutory provisions, and the mandate of Section 144B and 151A is clear. The operative direction was to grant liberty to the revenue to follow the correct procedure.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Krishan Kumar and Sons HUF, challenged an order dated 06.03.2024 passed under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a notice dated 06.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18. The petitioners argued that the issue was covered by previous judgments of the High Court. The respondents, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and another, did not dispute this. The High Court perused the file and considered the arguments presented by both parties.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order dated 06.03.2024 passed under Section 148A and the notice dated 06.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2017-18 are liable to be quashed? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioners contended that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by judgments of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 15745-2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023), which were rendered after the filing of this writ petition. Revenue's Contentions: The learned counsel appearing for the respondent did not dispute the submissions made by the petitioners.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 151A,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-5829-2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.219 CWP-5829-2024 Date of Decision: 28.08.2025 KRISHAN KUMAR AND SONS HUF

...Petitioners Versus

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present:- Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents. ***** LISA GILL, J. 1. Prayer in this writ petition is for quashing order dated 06.03.2024, under Section 148A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) and notice dated 06.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act by respondent No.2 in respect to AY 2017-18. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner at the outset submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509- 2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. He further submits that these judgments have been ANU 2025.09.03 11:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-5829-2024 2 rendered after filing of this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute the same. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the file with their able assistance. 5. Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra) and Jasjit Singh's case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Relevant portion of decision dated 19.07.2024 in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra) reads as under:- "15. From the perusal of Section 151A, it is quite evident that scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148 as well as 148A. Clause 3(b) of notification dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A clearly provides that scheme would be applicable to notice under Section 148. Even otherwise, it is a settled proposition of law that assessment proceedings commence from the stage of issuance of show cause notice. The object of introduction of faceless assessment would be defeated if show cause notice under Section 148 is issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The respondents are heavily placing reliance upon office memorandum and letter issued by departmental authorities. It is axiomatic in tax jurisprudence that circulars, instructions and letters issued by Board or any other authority cannot override statutory provisions. The circulars are binding upon authorities and Courts are not bound by circulars. The mandate of Section 144B, 151A readwith notification dated 29.03.2022 issued thereunder is quite lucid. There is no ambiguity in the language of statutory provisions, ANU 2025.09.03 11:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-5829-2024 3 thus, office memorandum or any other instruction issued by Board or any other authority cannot be relied upon." 6. In view of the above, present writ petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh's case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024. 7. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (LISA GILL) JUDGE

(MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE 28.08.2025 Anu Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ANU 2025.09.03 11:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →