Authority: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Order Date: 12 November 2024
Case Overview
- Petitioners: Shankar Rice Mills (represented by Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocate and Mr. Divya Suri, Advocate).
- Respondents: National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and others (represented by Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel, Revenue, via video conferencing).
- The petition challenged notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging that the Revenue Department had proceeded without conducting the faceless assessment mandated by Section 144B.
- The Court referenced earlier judgments: No.21509 of 2023 (Jasjit Singh vs Union of India) decided on 29‑07‑2024, and No.15745 of 2024 (Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs Union of India) decided on 19‑07‑2024, noting that the issues were already examined by the Coordinate Bench.
- The Court reiterated that instructions or circulars issued by the Board cannot override statutory provisions; they may only supplement the Act. Sections 119, 120 and Section 144B(7 & 8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, must be strictly followed.
- Notices under Section 148 dated 28‑02‑2023, 16‑03‑2023, 20‑03‑2024 and 30‑03‑2023, as well as the order dated 30‑03‑2023, were found to be beyond jurisdiction and consequently set aside.
- The Court also set aside notice (P‑3) under Section 148A(b) & (d) dated 06‑04‑2023 (P‑6) and notice dated 17‑02‑2023 (P‑2), along with consequential orders.
- The Revenue Department was directed to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961, if so advised.
Final Outcome
- All writ petitions filed by Shankar Rice Mills were allowed.
- All notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and related orders dated 28‑02‑2023, 16‑03‑2023, 20‑03‑2024, and 30‑03‑2023 are set aside for lack of jurisdiction.
- The interim order previously passed by the Court stands merged with the present order.
- All pending applications in the matter are disposed of accordingly.
Topics: Tax Assessment, Judicial Decision