Sajjan Gupta V. Union of India and Others

CWP/20074/2024

AI Insights

In the case of Sajjan Gupta vs. Union of India and Others, the petitioner challenged the notice and subsequent proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core issue revolved around the procedural adherence to statutory provisions in the issuance of notices and conducting assessments. The Income Tax Department, represented through video conferencing, acknowledged the applicability of a prior judgment (CWP No.21509 of 2023) which had set a precedent on similar grounds. The court's decision to set aside the notice and proceedings was based on the established legal principle that statutory provisions must be followed strictly and cannot be overridden by administrative instructions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 817596 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2024
• 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: INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 120

Judgement Text

" (O&M) Page 1 of 3 118 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2024 SAJJAN GUPTA . . . . Petitioner Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS . . . . Respondents **** CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Present: for the respondent(s) – Income tax department (through video conferencing mode). **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Notice of motion. 2. accepts notice on behalf of respondents/Income Tax Department. 3. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by 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 under: “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh (O&M) Page 2 of 3 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 powers contained 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 instructions and supplementing the 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 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 present order.” LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh (O&M) Page 3 of 3 4. Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 dated 07.04.2023 and consequential proceedings are set aside. 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE August 27, 2024 Lavisha 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No LAVISHA 2024.08.28 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh "