ANUPAMA MITTAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/13061/2025

AI Insights

The petitioner, Anupama Mittal, challenged a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, claiming lack of jurisdiction as per the Notification dated 28/29.03.2022, which designated exclusive powers to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) for issuing such notices. The case references several precedents where similar issues were addressed, leading to a decision that aligns with those precedents, allowing the respondents to proceed as per the statutory provisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 747195 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, 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: VARUN ISSAR; PRIDHI SANDHU
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT KAURA
• Keywords: Assessment proceedings; Faceless assessment; Jurisdiction; National Faceless Assessment Centre; Notice
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF 134 ANUPAMA MITTAL INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Mr. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing counsel for Income Tax and Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Senior Standing counsel for Income Tax. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 10.03.2023 (Annexure P-4) issued by respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1961’) and all consequential assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 has erroneously been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer although he has no jurisdiction to issue the same in view of the Notification dated 2 assessment proceedings and exclusive powers to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. He further submits that the coordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-13061-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 14.05.2025 ANUPAMA MITTAL Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing counsel for Income Tax and Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Senior Standing counsel for Income Tax. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 10.03.2023 4) issued by respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1961’) and all consequential assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 has erroneously been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer although he has no jurisdiction to issue the same in view of the Notification dated 28/29.03.2022 which provides for faceless assessment proceedings and National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) exclusive powers to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. He further submits that the coordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India and others PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2025 DATE OF DECISION: 14.05.2025 … Petitioner (s) ... Respondent(s) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing counsel for Income Tax and Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Senior Standing counsel for Income Tax. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 10.03.2023 4) issued by respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1961’) and all consequential 021-2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 has erroneously been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer although he has no jurisdiction to issue the same 8/29.03.2022 which provides for faceless National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive powers to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. He further submits that the coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.15745-2024 - Vs. Union of India and others and connected matter, ... Respondent(s) The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 10.03.2023 4) issued by respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1961’) and all consequential Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 has erroneously been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer although he has no jurisdiction to issue the same 8/29.03.2022 which provides for faceless has exclusive powers to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. He further - SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.15 09:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-13061-2025 decided on 19.07.2024 as well as CWP No.21509 of India and others allowed the writ petitions involving similar issue and liberty had been granted to the respondents therein to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 3. Therefore, the petition is dispose judgment in the case of (supra) and Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others (supra). Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 14.05.2025 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2025 decided on 19.07.2024 as well as CWP No.21509 of India and others and other connected matters, decided on allowed the writ petitions involving similar issue and liberty had been granted to the respondents therein to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. Therefore, the petition is disposed of in the same terms as the judgment in the case of Jatinder Singh Bhangu Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others (supra). Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANUPINDER SINGH (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No -2- decided on 19.07.2024 as well as CWP No.21509-2023-Jasjit Singh Vs. Union and other connected matters, decided on 29.07.2024, had allowed the writ petitions involving similar issue and liberty had been granted to the respondents therein to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 d of in the same terms as the Vs. Union of India and others Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and others (supra). Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No Jasjit Singh Vs. Union had allowed the writ petitions involving similar issue and liberty had been granted to the respondents therein to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 d of in the same terms as the Vs. Union of India and others SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.15 09:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "