KANAIL KAUR V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

CWP/33675/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a challenge to the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The petitioner contested the validity of these notices and the subsequent proceedings, arguing that they were not in accordance with the statutory provisions. The court referenced previous judgments, particularly the Coordinate Bench's decision in 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 agreed with these precedents and set aside the notices and proceedings for want of jurisdiction.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 725191 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2024
• 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: YOGESH PUTNEY
• Assessee Lawyers: UMANG GOYAL
• Keywords: Circulars; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Instructions; Jurisdiction
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

"118 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Karnail Kaur Union of India and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing counsel for Income Tax Department. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Yogesh Putney, behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department. 3. Both the counsel are petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of I 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others This Court in Jasjit Singh “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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-33675-2024 Date of Decision : Versus Union of India and others HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Mr. Umang Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing counsel for Income Tax Department. *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel, behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of I 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 2024 Date of Decision : 13.12.2024 …Petitioner ….Respondents SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH Umang Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing counsel for Income Tax ) Senior Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department. 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 CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024. (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 Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing counsel for Income Tax notice on that the issue involved in the present CWP No.21509 , decided on CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as , decided on 19.07.2024. RAJESH KUMAR 2024.12.17 09:46 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-33675-2024 override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. 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 usu 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 supp 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 th 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 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 re 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 pres order.” 2024 -2- 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 usu 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 supp 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. 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the pres order.” override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or 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 different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from e 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 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. 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 RAJESH KUMAR 2024.12.17 09:46 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-33675-2024 4. Keeping in view above, we terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply the present case. Accordingly, notice dated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential proceedings 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. December 13, 2024 ps 2024 -3- Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply the present case. Accordingly, notice dated 13.03.2024 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential proceedings thereof are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH , 2024 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to 13.03.2024 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 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 to ) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 RAJESH KUMAR 2024.12.17 09:46 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. "