MARK GULATI V. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KARNAL

CWP/23830/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions challenging the notices and proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle. The petitioners argued that the notices were issued without conducting the faceless assessment as required under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, and thus were contrary to the statutory provisions. The court referenced previous decisions in similar cases, particularly the Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, which held that such circulars or instructions could not override statutory provisions. The court concluded that the notices and subsequent proceedings were invalid due to lack of jurisdiction and set them aside.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 761985 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India, Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GAURI RAMPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH KUMAR; ANAND CHAUDHARI
• Keywords: Circulars; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

" 122 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT MARK GULATI DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME KARNAL CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Mr. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. 1. Notice of motion. 2. Ms on behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department. 3. Both the counsel are present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India a decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in “ 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 t IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23 Date of Decision: MARK GULATI V/s. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH (Through Video Conferencing/Hybrid Mode) Mr. Anand Chaudhari, Advocate Mr. Mahesh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent-Income Tax Department. ***** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Senior Standing Counsel, on behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department. Both the counsel are ad idem present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India a decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh “16. We are in agreement with 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 23830-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:18.09.2024 ..…...Petitioners (s) V/s. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE …......Respondent(s) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH (Through Video Conferencing/Hybrid Mode) , Advocate and for the petitioner. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Senior Standing Counsel Income Tax Department. , Senior Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department. ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in CWP 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 CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder 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 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 o be followed strictly and TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE notice that the issue involved in the CWP , CWP No.15745 of , Suresh Kumar 2024.09.19 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23830-2024 (O&M) 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 c 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 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 t 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 liberty to follow the proc 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.” 4. Keeping in view above, we aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 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 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 t 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. 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 aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply 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 ausing 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 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 revenue would be, however, at edure 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 allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis the mutatis Suresh Kumar 2024.09.19 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23830-2024 (O&M) mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated P-3) and consequential proceedi 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. September 18 Ess Kay Whether speaking / reasoned Whether Reportable 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 to the present case. Accordingly, notice Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated and consequential proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. [SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA 8, 2024 [SANJAY VASHISTH Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : Yes to the present case. Accordingly, notice(s) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated 30.03.2024 (Annexures P-1 to ngs are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE SANJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No issued by the 1 to Suresh Kumar 2024.09.19 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "