CHARAN SINGH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/14421/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around a series of notices and orders issued to Charan Singh by the Income Tax Officer, Phagwara, concerning the assessment year 2017-2018. These included a notice under Section 148, an assessment order under Sections 147, 144, and 144-B, and various penalty notices under Sections 156, 270A, 271 AAC (1), and 272 A (1) (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner challenged these actions on the grounds that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction, referencing a CBDT circular that specified the NFAC as the sole body authorized to issue such notices. The court's decision was influenced by similar cases previously decided, which recognized the procedural error in the issuance of the notices and orders by the local Income Tax Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 764915 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-05-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RANVIJAYSINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: B M MONGA; ROHIT KAURA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; CBDT; Jurisdiction; NFAC; Notice; Penalty
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 270A; 156; 144(b); 271 AAC(1); 272(A)(1)(d)

Judgement Text

"CWP-14421-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 196 CWP-14421-2025(O&M) Date of Decision:-19.05.2025 Charan Singh ....Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward-I, Phagwara & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. B.M. Monga, Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondents. *** SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. 1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 06.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); assessment order dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144-B of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; penalty show cause notice dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 270A of the Act, 1961; penalty show cause notice dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 271 AAC (1) of the Act, 1961; penalty show cause notice dated 11.03.2025 issued under Section 272 A (1) (d) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2017-2018. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India Gaurav Arora 2025.05.22 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-14421-2025 2 and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509- 2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. 3. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case. 5. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 06.02.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; assessment order dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144-B of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; penalty show cause notice dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 270A of the Act, 1961; penalty show cause notice dated 16.03.2025 issued under Section 271 AAC (1) of the Act, 1961; penalty show cause notice dated 11.03.2025 issued under Section 272 A (1) (d) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2017-2018, on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, in view of the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. 6. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 7. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of, in Gaurav Arora 2025.05.22 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-14421-2025 3 terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024. 8. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 19.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.05.22 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "