Authority: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

Order Date: 11 November 2024

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Gagan Wine Trade & Financiers Ltd.
  • Respondents: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle‑1, Bathinda and others (CWP‑30340, Decision No. 11.11.2024).
  • Counsel: Petitioner represented by Mr. Nikhil Goyal; Respondents represented by Ms. Samdisha Kaur and Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Urvashi Dhugga.
  • The Court referred to earlier judgments: Jasjit Singh vs Union of India (No.21509 of 2023, decided 29 July 2024) and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs Union of India (decided 19 July 2024).
  • It reiterated that revenue circulars or instructions cannot override statutory provisions; they may only supplement the law and must not render provisions otiose.
  • The Court highlighted that Sections 119, 120 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 144B(7 & 8) prohibit authorities from usurping legal provisions.

Legal Findings

  • Notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent proceedings without a faceless assessment under Section 144B were beyond jurisdiction.
  • Specific notices dated 28‑Feb‑2023, 16‑Mar‑2023, 20‑Mar‑2024, and 30‑Mar‑2023, together with the order dated 30‑Mar‑2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction.
  • The Court held that the revenue may proceed only in accordance with the procedures laid down in the Act.

Final Outcome

  • All writ petitions filed by the petitioner are allowed.
  • The interim order previously passed stands merged with the revenue’s order.
  • All pending applications in the matter are disposed of.

Topics: Tax Law, Judicial Review