NEERAJ BANSAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/21477/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a challenge to the notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were initiated without conducting the faceless assessment as required under Section 144B. The petitioner argued that the actions taken were contrary to the statutory provisions and caused confusion and hardship. The court referenced previous decisions in similar cases, notably Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, which had set precedents on the matter. The court's decision reinforced the principle that administrative instructions cannot override statutory laws, especially those concerning financial obligations.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 678569 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: YOGESH PUTNEY; VAIBHAV GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: B M MONGA; ROHIT KAURA
• Keywords: Circulars and Instructions; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

"CWP-21477-2024 133 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT NEERAJ BANSAL INCOME TAX OFFICER AND CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR Present: Mr Mr. for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Counsel for the respondents/Revenue. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Yogesh Putney 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 tit and others held as under: 2024 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH NEERAJ BANSAL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE **** Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate with Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Counsel for the respondents/Revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Notice of motion. Yogesh Putney, 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: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21477-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.08.2024 . . . . Petitioner . . . . Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA RITU TAGORE Advocate with Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Counsel SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) , Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of 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, and by the Coordinate Bench in CWP led as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India , decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) (O&M) .2024 Petitioner s accepts notice on behalf of that the issue involved in the present CWP , CWP led as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India (supra) MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21477-2024 by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or instructions by the 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 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 taxpayer and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation. no occasion to distinguish or take a di 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 an 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, 20.0 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 “16. 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 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 implementation. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take a di 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 an 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, 20.0 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or 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 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 s. 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 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 MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21477-2024 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.” 4. Keeping in view above, terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis Jurisdictional Assessing Officer consequential proceedings 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. August 30, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 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. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged 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, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated 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 revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. he 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 issued by the u/s 148 dated 22.03.2024, and are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (RITU TAGORE) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No this Writ Petition in the aforesaid mutatis issued by the and MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "