PRIDHI APPARELS LLP V. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER

CWP/11502/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Pridhi Apparels LLP as the petitioner against the Commissioner of Income Tax and another respondent. The core issue revolved around the legality of certain notices and orders issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961, specifically concerning the override of statutory provisions by circulars or instructions from the Board. The petitioner challenged the notices and orders, arguing that they were issued without proper jurisdiction and contradicted the statutory requirements for faceless assessments. The court referenced a previous decision in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India to support its ruling that statutory provisions must be adhered to strictly, and any circulars or instructions that attempt to override these provisions are invalid.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 749527 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VARUN ISSAR
• Assessee Lawyers: VISHAL CHECHI; VIVEK BANSAL; KUNWAR RAJAN
• Keywords: Circulars and Instructions; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B(8); 120; 144B(7)

Judgement Text

"CWP-11502-2024 246-27 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT PRIDHI APPARELS LLP PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr Mr. Vishal Chechi, Advocate Mr. for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, for the respondents/Revenue. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Both the counsel are petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the this Court in of India and others under: by the Coordinate instructions by the Board could not have override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the 2024 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH PRIDHI APPARELS LLP Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Mr. Vivek Bansal, Advocate Mr. Vishal Chechi, Advocate Mr. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents/Revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024, wherein this Court held as “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such instructions by the Board could not have override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11502-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.08.2024 . . . . Petitioner COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER . . . . Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH Sr. Standing Counsel SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union , decided on 29.07.2024, wherein this Court held as 16. We are in agreement with the view taken 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 be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the (O&M) .2024 Petitioner . . . . Respondents that the issue involved in the present judgment passed by CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union , decided on 29.07.2024, wherein this Court held as MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-11502-2024 powers contained 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their own the assessees. It also leaves the taxpayer statutory provisions and no occasion to suggested by the learned counsel for what has already been held by the C Coordinate Bench under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under Sec 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. 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 2. Keeping in view above, terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 powers contained Sections 119 and 120 of the Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the 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 instructions and statutory provisions and 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 what has already been held by the C 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 Sec 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 present order.” Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply 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 satisfaction and convenience causing hardship to confusion in the minds of instructions and supplementing the 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is 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 (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 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 this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis this Writ Petition in the aforesaid mutatis MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-11502-2024 mutandis 30.03.2024 3. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. August 13, 2024 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 dated .03.2024 and all consequential proceedings All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , 2024 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No Accordingly, notice u/s 148 dated and all consequential proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Accordingly, notice u/s 148 dated MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.14 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "