Authority: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Order Date: 26.09.2024
Case Overview
- Petitioner: Aggarwal Sales (Sales …Petitioner)
- Respondents: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others
- Bench (Coram): Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisht
- Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate
- Counsel for Revenue: Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel (accepted notice on behalf of the revenue)
- The petition challenged several notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging lack of jurisdiction and procedural irregularities.
- The Court referred to earlier judgments: Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India (CWP No.15745 of 2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of (CWP No.21509 of 2023, decided 29.07.2024), emphasizing that circulars or instructions cannot override statutory provisions and that faceless assessment under Section 144B must be observed.
- The Court held that notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024, 30.03.2023 and the order dated 30.03.2023, as well as the notice dated 31.08.2024, were issued without complying with the faceless assessment procedure and were therefore beyond the authority’s jurisdiction.
Final Outcome
- All writ petitions filed by Aggarwal Sales are allowed.
- The interim order previously passed merges with the present order.
- Notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 dated 31.08.2024 and the earlier notices (28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024, 30.03.2023) along with the order dated 30.03.2023 are set aside for want of jurisdiction.
- All pending applications in the matter are disposed of accordingly.
- The revenue department is at liberty to re‑initiate proceedings only after following the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961, including the faceless assessment mechanism under Section 144B.
Topics: Tax Law, Income Tax Procedure