SHAMA BHALLA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/18366/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shama Bhalla, the petitioner, challenging certain notices and proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that these actions were contrary to the provisions of the Act, specifically pointing out the lack of faceless assessment as mandated under Section 144B. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, referencing a previous judgment in the case of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, concurred with the petitioner and set aside the notices and proceedings in question. The court also noted that the challenge to the vires of explanation 2(iv) to Section 148 remains open for future adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 679905 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: 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: RANVIJAYSINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKHIL GOYAL
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income Tax; Jurisdiction; Notices; Vires
• Section: 148; 144B

Judgement Text

"125 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Shama Bhalla Income Tax Officer CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTIC Present Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate Mr. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits vires to explanation 2 (iv) to Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, same may be left open and the terms of judgment passed by the Coordin titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others 19.07.2024. Learned counsel submits that he does not press the other grounds in the present petition. 2. In concurred with the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench in 15745-2024 (supra) and held as under: 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Sec 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Shama Bhalla Vs. Income Tax Officer and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHIST Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits to explanation 2 (iv) to Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, same may be left open and the case of the petitioner can be disposed of in terms of judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench in CWP Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others 19.07.2024. Learned counsel submits that he does not press the other grounds in the present petition. In CWP-21509-2023 and other bunch of petitions, concurred with the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench in 2024 (supra) and held as under:- 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under Sec 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-18366-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.08.2024 …Petitioner …Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH for the petitioner. Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits so far as challenge to to explanation 2 (iv) to Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the case of the petitioner can be disposed of in ate Bench in CWP-15745-2024, Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024. Learned counsel submits that he does not press the other grounds and other bunch of petitions, we have also concurred with the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench in CWP- 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 so far as challenge to 1961, the case of the petitioner can be disposed of in 2024, , decided on 19.07.2024. Learned counsel submits that he does not press the other grounds we have also - 18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench tion 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 RAJESH KUMAR 2024.08.07 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. CWP-18366-2024 (O&M) [2] 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. 3. In view thereof, the writ petition is allowed and notices dated 28.03.2024 and 30.06.2024 are set aside. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. However, 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. It is made clear that challenge to vires to explanation 2(iv) to Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is left open for proper adjudication. 4. All pending misc. application(s) also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 02.08.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2024.08.07 11:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. "