HERO CYCLES LTD V. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AMRITSAR AND OTHERS

CWP/8405/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Hero Cycles Ltd against the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, where the petitioner sought the preponement of the main case and the disposal of the writ petition based on previous judgments that had concluded similar issues. The court referenced decisions in related cases, particularly focusing on the adherence to statutory provisions over administrative instructions in the context of tax assessments and the issuance of notices under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court's decision reinforced the principle that legislative enactments with financial implications must be adhered to strictly, and any administrative instructions should only supplement these provisions, not override them.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748540 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2024
• 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: URVASHI DHUGGA; RANVIJAYSINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY VASHISTH
• Keywords: Circulars and Instructions; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Legal provisions; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

"CWP-8405-2024 111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT HERO CYCLES LTD CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, for the Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Application have been filed by the and praying for Division Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union o 19.07.2024 2. All the counsel are petition stands finally No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others 2024 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-16205-CWP-2024 & HERO CYCLES LTD Vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondent No.1. Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Applications No.CM-16205-CWP-2024 & been filed by the petitioner seeking preponement of the main case praying for disposing off the writ petition Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others 19.07.2024 the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH & CM-16206-CWP-2024 in/and CWP-8405-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.10.2024 . . . . Petitioner CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR AND OTHERS . . . . Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH , Advocate for the petitioner. Sr. Standing Counsel Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 2024 & CM-16206-CWP-2024 seeking preponement of the main case disposing off the writ petition in view of judgment of CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as f India and others, decided on that the issue involved in the present examined and concluded by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, in/and (O&M) .10.2024 Petitioner . . . . Respondents 2024 seeking preponement of the main case in view of judgment of CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as , decided on that the issue involved in the present CWP , MOHIT GOYAL 2024.10.23 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8405-2024 decided on 29.07.2024, Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others Jasjit Singh by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such ci instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusio taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. no occasi suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the A provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others Jasjit Singh (supra) held as under: “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such ci instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusio taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices and by the Coordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others (supra). This Court in We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is on to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the ct, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices Jatinder . This Court in MOHIT GOYAL 2024.10.23 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8405-2024 dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” 3. Accordin No.CM Case is taken on board today. 4. Keeping in view above, aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis 28.03.2024 Jurisdictional Assessing Offi proceedings are set aside. 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. October 22, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 19. The respondents-revenue wou at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” Accordingly, we allow the prayer as above, and the CM-16205-CWP-2024 & CM-16206 Case is taken on board today. Keeping in view above, we prepone and aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. .03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer as well as the consequential proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , 2024 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged gly, we allow the prayer as above, and the applications 16206-CWP-2024 stand allowed. prepone and allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply to the present case. Accordingly, notice dated issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by cer as well as the consequential All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No s . this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply dated issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by cer as well as the consequential MOHIT GOYAL 2024.10.23 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "