VINOD AGARWAL V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1 FARIDABAD AND OTHERS

CWP/11621/2025

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. The petitioner argued that according to a notification from the Ministry of Finance, the notice should have been issued through a faceless assessment process, not by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The court referenced two previous judgments, Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh, which supported the petitioner's stance. Consequently, the court quashed the notice, allowing the respondents to reissue it through the correct procedural channel.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 747585 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of India, Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VARUN ISSAR
• Assessee Lawyers: KARTIK BANSAL
• Keywords: Faceless assessment; Income tax notice; Jurisdictional Assessing Officer
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"CWP-11621-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Vinod Agarwal Assistant Commissioner of Income CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. M for the respondent DEEPAK SIBAL Challenge made through the instant pe dated 30.03.2024 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 done because in terms of the notification 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, petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: i. CWP India and others, 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.158 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11621 Date of Decision : Vinod Agarwal … Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Faridabad …Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. M.K. Singla, Advocate for Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Advocate, for the respondent-Income Tax Department. *** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) Challenge made through the instant pe .03.2024 (Annexure P-1) issued to the petitioner by the respondents 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 done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned ould have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. In support of his afore submission, petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu India and others, decided on 19.07.2024; and Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 621-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 28.04.2025 …Petitioner Circle 1, Faridabad and others …Respondents DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Income Tax Department. Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice ) issued to the petitioner by the respondents 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 dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2), issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned ould have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:- Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of decided on 19.07.2024; and VANDANA 2025.05.05 12:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-11621-2025 ii. CWP others 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co Benches of this Court in 4. In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh dated 30.03.2024 (Annexure P Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 5. The April 28, 202 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh others, decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co Benches of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra) .03.2024 (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. The petition is allowed in the above terms. (DEEPAK SIBAL JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE , 2025 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Page 2 of 2 Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co-ordinate Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in (supra), the impugned notice ), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against petition is allowed in the above terms. DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2025.05.05 12:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "