SANTOSH EXIM V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/15882/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Santosh Exim challenging various notices and orders issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5, Yamuna Nagar, related to the assessment year 2018-2019. The challenges were based on a CBDT circular dated 29.03.2022, which specified that only the NFAC has the exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner referenced similar cases (Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh) where the writ petitions were allowed, leading to the current petition's disposal with directions to the Appellate Authority to decide based on the precedents set in those cases.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 763442 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-05-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, 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: SAURABH KAPOOR; MUSKAN GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: B M MONGA; ROHIT KAURA; RAJIV SHARMA
• Keywords: Assessment Order; CBDT Circular; Demand notice; Income Tax; NFAC; Notice
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 156; 144(b)

Judgement Text

"CWP-15882-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 213 CWP-15882-2025(O&M) Date of Decision:-28.05.2025 Santosh Exim ....Petitioner Vs. Income Tax Officer,Ward 5, Yamuna Nagar & ors. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. B.M. Monga, Mr. Rohit Kaura, Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. *** SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J. 1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 30.03.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961”) ; assessment order dated 18.03.2023 issued under Section 147 read with Sections 144/144-B of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 18.03.2023 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2018- 2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509- 2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority. Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-15882-2025 2 3. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case. 5. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.03.2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961; assessment order dated 18.03.2023 issued under Section 147 read with Sections 144/144-B of the Act, 1961; demand notice dated 18.03.2023 issued under Section 156 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2018-2019, in view of the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. 6. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. 7. Since in the present case, the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner, in terms of the judgments mentioned above. 8. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE 28.05.2025 Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.06.06 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "