Suresh Kumar V. Union of India and Others

CWP/38540/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around a challenge to a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to the petitioner, Suresh Kumar. The petitioner contested the validity of the notice, arguing that it should have been issued through a faceless assessment process as per the Ministry of Finance's notification dated 29.03.2022. The petitioner supported his argument by referencing two previous judgments by the High Court, which favored the use of faceless assessments in similar circumstances. The respondents did not dispute the applicability of these precedents. Consequently, the court quashed the notice and allowed the respondents to reissue it following the correct procedural guidelines.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824257 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2025
• 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: URVASHI DHUGGA; VIDUL KAPOOR
• Assessee Lawyers: SARTHAK SONI
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Jurisdictional Assessing Officer; Notice Challenge
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"CWP-38540-2025 -1- 151 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-38540-2025 Date of decision: 22.12.2025 SURESH KUMAR ...Petitioner VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Mr. Sarthak Soni, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Junior Standing Counsel, for the Income Tax Department. ***** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) 1. Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued to the petitioner by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer which could have not been done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. 2. In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:- (i) CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024; and (ii) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024. Printed from counselvise.com PRIYANKA THAKUR 2025.12.23 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-38540-2025 -2- 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). 4. In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra), the impugned notice dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 5. The petition is allowed in the above terms. (DEEPAK SIBAL ) JUDGE (YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) 22.12.2025 JUDGE Priyanka Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Printed from counselvise.com PRIYANKA THAKUR 2025.12.23 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "