DRISHINDER SINGH SANDHAWALIA V. PRINCIPAL COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX (1), CHANDIGARH

CWP/11614/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around a challenge to a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The petitioner argued that the notice should have been issued through a faceless assessment process as mandated by a notification from the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, dated 29.03.2022. The court referenced two previous judgments, Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh, which supported the petitioner's stance that the notice was improperly issued. Consequently, the court quashed the notice, allowing the respondents to reissue it if necessary, following the correct procedural guidelines.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 767018 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India, CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: YOGESH PUTNEY; VAIBHAV GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: ADARSH DUBEY
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income tax notice; Jurisdictional Assessing Officer
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"CWP-11614-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Drishinder Singh Sandhawalia Principal Commissioner of CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Mr. Adarsh Kumar Dubey, for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel, with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, for the Income Tax Department DEEPAK SIBAL Challenge made through the instant pe dated 30.03.202 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessin done because in terms of the notification issued by the notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. 2. In petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: i. CWP India and others, 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11614 Date of Decision : Drishinder Singh Sandhawalia Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Viraj Gandhi, Advocate and Mr. Adarsh Kumar Dubey, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel, with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department-respondents. *** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) Challenge made through the instant pe .2025 (Annexure P-1) issued to the petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer which could done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned ould have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu India and others, decided on 19.07.2024; and Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 11614-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 28.04.2025 …Petitioner I, Chandigarh and others …Respondents DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Advocate, Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel, with respondents. Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice ) issued to the petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been Officer which could have not been dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-3), Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned ould have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:- Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of decided on 19.07.2024; and VANDANA 2025.05.06 14:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-11614-2025 ii. CWP others, 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner through the aforesaid two judgments render Benches of this Court in 4. In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu dated 30.03.2025 Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 5. The petition is allowed in the above terms. April 28, 202 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh others, decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co Benches of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra) .03.2025 (Annexure P-1), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. The petition is allowed in the above terms. (DEEPAK SIBAL JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE , 2025 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Page 2 of 2 Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact is covered in his favour by the law laid down ed by two different co-ordinate Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in (supra), the impugned notice ), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against The petition is allowed in the above terms. DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2025.05.06 14:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "