MUKESH GOEL V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

CWP/30472/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a challenge to the notices and orders issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act. The petitioners argued that the circulars and instructions issued by the Board were being used to override statutory provisions, causing confusion and hardship to the assessees. The court referenced two previous decisions, Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, which had similar issues and conclusions. The court held that legislative enactments with financial implications must be adhered to strictly and that instructions and circulars can only supplement these statutory provisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748285 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India, Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VARUN ISSAR
• Assessee Lawyers: KARTIK BANSAL
• Keywords: Circular; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Legal provisions; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

"CWP-30472-2024 120 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Mukesh Goel Assistant Commissioner of Income CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: M Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents/revenue. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Varun Issar respondents/Revenue 3. Both the counsel are petition stands finally No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others decided on 29.07.2024, No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others held as under: by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or 2024 Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents/revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel respondents/Revenue. Both 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 decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in held as under: “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-30472-2024 Date of Decision: 12.11.2024 . . . . Petitioner Tax and others . . . . Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH r. Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents/revenue. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of that the issue involved in the present concluded by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, and by the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India .2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or 2024 12.11.2024 Petitioner . . . . Respondents accepts notice on behalf of that the issue involved in the present CWP , CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India (supra) RASHMI 2024.11.13 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-30472-2024 instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities 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 onl supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless asse Act, 1961, have been found to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices 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 at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 2024 Page 2 of 3 instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities 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 onl 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 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 would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 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 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 no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from 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 ssment 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 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. RASHMI 2024.11.13 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-30472-2024 interim order passed by the Court shall with the present order.” 4. Keeping in view above, terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis 2) issued by Income Tax Act, 1961 and 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. November 12, rashmi 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? 2024 Page 3 of 3 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall with the present order.” Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer Income Tax Act, 1961 and the consequential proceedings All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA November 12, 2024 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis Accordingly, notice dated 29.03.2024(P- Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the consequential proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No this Writ Petition in the aforesaid mutatis - of the RASHMI 2024.11.13 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "