Rajinder Goel V. Union of India

CWP/29709/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Rajinder Goel, the proprietor of M/S Pooja Jewellers, who filed a writ petition against the Union of India and others concerning notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner challenged the jurisdiction of the notices and the subsequent proceedings, arguing that they were not conducted as per the statutory requirements. The court referenced similar cases, particularly Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, where it was held that such circulars or instructions could not override statutory provisions. The court's decision reinforced the principle that legislative enactments with financial implications must be followed strictly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 801724 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2024
• 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: SAURABH KAPOOR; PRIDHI SANDHU; MUSKAAN GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHISHEK SHARMA; RAKESH CAJLA; ARMAAN CAJLA
• Keywords: Circulars; Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

" 107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT RAJINDER GOEL PROPRIETOR OF M/S POOJA JEWELLERS, PATIALA UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Mr. Rakesh Cajla, Advocate Mr. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel, with Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel and Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. 1. Notice 2. Mr. 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 and others 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-29709 Date of Decision: RAJINDER GOEL PROPRIETOR OF M/S POOJA JEWELLERS, PATIALA V/s. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Cajla, Advocate and Mr. Armaan Cajla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel, with Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel and Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-Income Tax Department. ***** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, 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 and others 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 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 29709-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:04.11.2024 RAJINDER GOEL PROPRIETOR OF M/S POOJA JEWELLERS, PATIALA ..…...Petitioner(s) V/s. …......Respondent(s) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH , Advocate, and for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel, with Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel and 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, 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 (s) ) notice that the issue involved in the CWP , CWP No.15745 of , Suresh Kumar 2024.11.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29709-2024 (O&M) obsolete. Leg 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 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 supplem 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 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 Sect 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 respon 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 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 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 different view as suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from 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 Sect 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 present order.” islative 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 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 enting 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 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 Suresh Kumar 2024.11.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-29709-2024 (O&M) 4. Keeping in view above, we aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice (Annexures P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 set aside. 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. November 4, Ess Kay Whether speaking / reasoned Whether Reportable 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 Keeping in view above, we allow aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply to the present case. Accordingly, notice P-1 to P-3) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential proceedings All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. [SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , 2024 [SANJAY VASHISTH Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : Yes allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis to the present case. Accordingly, notices dated 28.03.2024 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 consequential proceedings thereof are All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE SANJAY VASHISTH] JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No this Writ Petition in the mutatis 4 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 are Suresh Kumar 2024.11.05 09:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "