UKLANA COMMODITIES PRIVATE LIMITED V. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

CWP/22403/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Uklana Commodities Private Limited challenging the actions of the Income Tax Officer and others, which were based on certain instructions and circulars that allegedly overridden statutory provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that these actions were not in compliance with the legal framework established by the Act, particularly concerning the conduct of faceless assessments and the issuance of notices under Section 148. The court referenced similar cases, particularly the Coordinate Bench's decisions in Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, which had set precedents that supported the petitioner's stance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 749365 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India, Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: GAURI RAMPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RANA SINGH; NIKHIL GOYAL
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Financial Implications; Income Tax; Legal provisions; Statutory provisions
• Section: 148; 119; 144B; 148A(b); 148A(d); 120

Judgement Text

"CWP-22403-2024 139 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Uklana Commodities Private Limited Income Tax Officer and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. for the respondents ( SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal of respondents/Revenue 3. Both the counsel are petition stands finally No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others decided on 29.07.2024, No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India 2024 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Uklana Commodities Private Limited Vs. Income Tax Officer and others **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH **** Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondents/Revenue. (through Video Conferencing) **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Notice of motion. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Counsel respondents/Revenue. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the 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 Benc No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22403-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.09.2024 . . . . Petitioner . . . . Respondents HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Sr. Standing Counsel SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf that the issue involved in the present examined and concluded by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, and by the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India (O&M) .2024 Petitioner . . . . Respondents accepts notice on behalf that the issue involved in the present CWP , CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India MOHIT GOYAL 2024.09.05 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-22403-2024 and others held as under: by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising t 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 confus 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. no occa suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench. Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO under 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 da 2024 (O&M) Page 2 of 3 and others, decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in held as under: “16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such instructions by the Board could not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or 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 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 , decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) 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 obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and he 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 ion 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 17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is sion 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 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 ted 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and (supra) MOHIT GOYAL 2024.09.05 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-22403-2024 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accord interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” 4. Keeping in view above, terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis Jurisdictional Assessing Officer 23.03.2023(P 148 and the order dated 05.04.2023(P well as the 5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. September 05 Mohit goyal 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? 2. Whether reportable? 2024 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 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 accord 20. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.” Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 23.03.2023(P-1), notice dated 05.04.2023(P and the order dated 05.04.2023(P well as the consequential proceedings are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA , 2024 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No 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 this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis Accordingly, notice issued by under Section 148A(b) dated 5.04.2023(P-3) issued under Section and the order dated 05.04.2023(P-2) under Section 148A(d) as are set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No this Writ Petition in the aforesaid mutatis issued by dated issued under Section as MOHIT GOYAL 2024.09.05 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "