GULSHAN ARORA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/15891/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around a series of notices and orders issued to the petitioner, Gulshan Arora, by the Income Tax Officer under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the assessment year 2019-2020. The petitioner challenged the validity of these notices and orders, arguing that they were issued by an authority without jurisdiction, referencing a CBDT circular that specified the NFAC as the sole body authorized to issue such notices. The court examined similar precedents and found in favor of the petitioner, thereby invalidating the contested notices and orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 746668 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-05-2025
• 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: RANVIJAYSINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: B M MONGA; ROHIT KAURA; RAJIV SHARMA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; CBDT Circular; Consequential actions; Demand notice; Jurisdiction; NFAC exclusive power; Notice; Penalty order
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 271B; 270A; 272A(1)(d); 156; 144(b); 271A

Judgement Text

"CWP-15891-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 218 CWP-15891-2025(O&M) Date of Decision:-28.05.2025 Gulshan Arora ....Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. B.M. Monga, Mr. Rohit Kaura, Mr. Rajiv Sharma, 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 31.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”); assessment order dated 12.01.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 144/144-B of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 12.01.2024 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; penalty orders dated 12.07.2024 issued under Section 270A of the Act, 1961 and order dated 08.07.2024 issued under Section 271A of the Act, 1961, order dated 16.07.2024 issued under Section 271B of the Act, 1961; order dated 05.07.2024 issued under Section 272A(1) (d) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020. 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 and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-15891-2025 2 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 31.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; assessment order dated 12.01.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 144/144-B of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 12.01.2024 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961; penalty orders dated 12.07.2024 issued under Section 270A of the Act, 1961 and order dated 08.07.2024 issued under Section 271A of the Act, 1961, order dated 16.07.2024 issued under Section 271B of the Act, 1961; order dated 05.07.2024 issued under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020, 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 terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-15891-2025 3 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 28.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "