Gagandeep Singh Luthra V. Income Tax Officer and others

CWP/19547/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a challenge by Gagandeep Singh Luthra against a notice issued by the Income Tax Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that the notice was improperly issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, contrary to the requirements set forth in a notification from the Ministry of Finance, which stipulated that such notices should be issued through faceless assessment. The court referenced two prior judgments that supported the petitioner's position, leading to the quashing of the notice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 822360 (HC-HIMACHAL_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2025
• 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: URVASHI DHUGGA; VIDUL KAPOOR; VAIBHAV GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT KAURA
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Jurisdictional Assessing Officer; Notice Challenge
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.110 CWP-37254-2025 Date of decision: 12.12.2025 Gagandeep Singh Luthra ....Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present: Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing Counsel Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing Counsel for the respondents. * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) 1. The challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 31.03.2025 (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 have not been done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2) issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. 2. In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:- (i) CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024; and Printed from counselvise.com JYOTI SHARMA 2025.12.15 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh CWP-37254-2025 -2- (ii) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra) . 4. In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra) , the impugned notice dated 31.03.2025 (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. 5. The petition is disposed in the above terms. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) JUDGE December 12, 2025 Jyoti 1 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Printed from counselvise.com JYOTI SHARMA 2025.12.15 12:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh "