Authority: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, Mrs. Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta)
Order Date: 08.05.2025
Case Overview
- Petitioner: Mani Ram Balwant Rai HUF (HUF)
- Respondents: Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and other revenue officials
- The petition challenged several income‑tax notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including notices dated 28‑Feb‑2023, 16‑Mar‑2023, 20‑Mar‑2024, 30‑Mar‑2023 and a notice dated 01‑Mar‑2025, along with the order dated 30‑Mar‑2023.
- The Court referred to earlier judgments: India and others v. Union of India (CWP No.15745 of 2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh v. Union of India (CWP No.21509 of 2023, decided 29.07.2024), emphasizing that circulars or instructions cannot override statutory provisions and must only supplement them.
- It held that notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) without conducting the faceless assessment mandated by Section 144B of the Act were ultra vires and therefore void.
- The Court stressed that authorities must strictly follow the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and cannot usurp legal provisions for convenience, as such actions cause hardship and confusion to taxpayers.
Final Outcome
- The writ petition is allowed.
- Notices dated 28‑Feb‑2023, 16‑Mar‑2023, 20‑Mar‑2024, 30‑Mar‑2023 and the order dated 30‑Mar‑2023 are set aside for want of jurisdiction.
- The notice issued by the JAO under Section 148 dated 01‑Mar‑2025 and all consequential proceedings are also set aside.
- All pending applications in the matter are disposed of accordingly.
- The revenue department is at liberty to re‑initiate assessment following the procedure prescribed under the Income Tax Act, 1961, if it so advises.
Topics: Tax Assessment, Judicial Review