AMIT SAKET AND CO V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 HISAR

CWP/19837/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Amit Saket and Co. vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Hisar, where the petitioner challenged the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Officer in issuing notices and orders without conducting a faceless assessment as required under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court referenced a previous judgment in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India, which set a precedent that such procedural lapses render the actions of the tax authorities invalid. Both parties agreed that the issue was conclusively addressed in the cited precedent, leading to the allowance of the writ petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 749523 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VEDIKA; GAURI NEO RAMPAL OPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ALOK MITTAL; ISHWINDER SINGH
• Keywords: Circulars; Faceless assessment; Jurisdiction; Statutory provisions; Taxpayer rights
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

"CWP-19837-2024 120 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT AMIT SAKET AND CO INCOME TAX OFFICER CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr Mr. for the petitioner. Ms. Vedika, Advocate for Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Notice 2. Ms. Vedika, Advocate for Counsel 3. Both the counsel are petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by this Court in of India and others under: by the Coordinate 2024 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AMIT SAKET AND CO. Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, HISAR **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate with Mr. Ishwinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Vedika, Advocate for Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Notice of motion. Ms. Vedika, Advocate for Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents/Revenue Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024, wherei “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19837-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.08.2024 . . . . Petitioner . . . . Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing Counsel SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing respondents/Revenue. that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union , decided on 29.07.2024, wherein this Court held as 16. We are in agreement with the view taken Bench and hold that such circular or (O&M) .2024 Petitioner . . . . Respondents Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Sr. Standing that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union n this Court held as MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 15:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19837-2024 instructions by the Board could not have override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own the assessees. It also leaves the taxpayers statutory provisions and no occasion to suggested by the learned counsel for what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. Coordinate Bench under Section 148 o initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have bee provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated 28.02.202 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 instructions by the Board could not have override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers instructions and statutory provisions and 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have beesn found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 19. The respondents-revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or Legislative enactments having financial be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to confusion in the minds of instructions and supplementing the 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is uish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the (supra), notices issued by the JAO f the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the n found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices 3, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 15:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19837-2024 4. Keeping in view above, terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis 23.03.2023, order u/s 148A(d) dated 05.04.2023, 05.04.2023 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. August 14, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, 23.03.2023, order u/s 148A(d) dated 05.04.2023, 05.04.2023 and consequential proceedings All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , 2024 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis Accordingly, notice u/s 148A(b) dated 23.03.2023, order u/s 148A(d) dated 05.04.2023, notice u/s 148 dated consequential proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No this Writ Petition in the aforesaid mutatis notice u/s 148A(b) dated notice u/s 148 dated MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 15:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "