" CWP No. 18951 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Vishal Garg Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: SANJAY VASHISTH the notices issued to him under Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) and subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2024 for AY 2020 2. through firm M/s Ecomed Mullana and M/s M. M. Healthcare, Solan and also earning commission from marketing activities and supply of electricity through proprietorship firm 3. by respondent no. 3 on 16.12.2022, 26.12.2022 and 06.01.2023 whereby he was asked to furnish information as per the documents attached to the notice CWP No. 18951 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18951 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Pronouncement Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Mrs. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 5. Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Senior Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 (through video conferencing) *** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner prays for quashing the notices issued to him under Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) and subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2024 for AY 2020-21. The petitioner is engaged in the business of sale of medicines through firm M/s Ecomed Mullana and M/s M. M. Healthcare, Solan and also earning commission from marketing activities and supply of electricity through proprietorship firm Imperial Consultancy A notice under Section 133(6) of the Act was served upon him by respondent no. 3 on 16.12.2022, 26.12.2022 and 06.01.2023 whereby he was asked to furnish information as per the documents attached to the notice -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18951 of 2024 (O&M) Reserved on : 03.09.2024 Pronouncement: 19.09.2024 …Petitioner Versus and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Advocate assisted by , for the petitioner. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal Opal, Senior Standing Counsel (through video conferencing). By way of this writ petition, the petitioner prays for quashing of the notices issued to him under Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) and subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act The petitioner is engaged in the business of sale of medicines through firm M/s Ecomed Mullana and M/s M. M. Healthcare, Solan and also earning commission from marketing activities and supply of electricity onsultancy Services. A notice under Section 133(6) of the Act was served upon him by respondent no. 3 on 16.12.2022, 26.12.2022 and 06.01.2023 whereby he was asked to furnish information as per the documents attached to the notice CWP No. 18951 of 2024 (O&M) of the notices issued to him under Section 133 (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) and subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act The petitioner is engaged in the business of sale of medicines through firm M/s Ecomed Mullana and M/s M. M. Healthcare, Solan and also earning commission from marketing activities and supply of electricity A notice under Section 133(6) of the Act was served upon him by respondent no. 3 on 16.12.2022, 26.12.2022 and 06.01.2023 whereby he was asked to furnish information as per the documents attached to the notice VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 Annexure-1 receipts and fees for professional and technical services. 4. disclosing that during A.Y. 2021 UFO Moviez India Limited of as part of business turnover disclosed in the I petitioner on 04.01.2021. The same has been duly processed and refund of 1,14,920/- was also shown after processing under Section 143(1) of the Act on 28.09.2021. 5. the Act on 31.03.2024 with the assumption that he has received a commission of assessee had not filed reply during proceedings under Section 133(6) of the Act, and therefore, it was stated as undi 6. been filed by the petitioner answering to the specific aspect i.e. commission was on record and the same has been erroneously assumed to have not been filed and there has submitted that the amount was already shown in his return, and therefore, there was no occasion for the respondents issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act as there was no income escaped or remained processing the income tax return for A.Y. 2020 7. judgment in reasons for determination of belief must have a rat CWP No. 18951 of 2024 and query no. 6 informing about the details of contractual receipts and fees for professional and technical services. In response, the petitioner filed reply including query no.6 disclosing that during A.Y. 2021-22, he had received sales commission from UFO Moviez India Limited of ` 14,58,004/- as part of business turnover disclosed in the I petitioner on 04.01.2021. The same has been duly processed and refund of was also shown after processing under Section 143(1) of the Act on 28.09.2021. The petitioner was served with a notice under Section 148 the Act on 31.03.2024 with the assumption that he has received a commission of ` 14,58,004/-. The notice mentioned that the petitioner assessee had not filed reply during proceedings under Section 133(6) of the Act, and therefore, it was stated as undisclosed income. It is the submission of the petitioner that the reply which had been filed by the petitioner answering to the specific aspect i.e. commission was on record and the same has been erroneously assumed to have not been filed and there has been complete non-application of mind. It is further submitted that the amount was already shown in his return, and therefore, there was no occasion for the respondents issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act as there was no income escaped or remained processing the income tax return for A.Y. 2020 Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Supreme Court judgment in ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass reasons for determination of belief must have a rat -2- orming about the details of contractual receipts and fees for professional and technical services. In response, the petitioner filed reply including query no.6 22, he had received sales commission from which was duly offered for tax as part of business turnover disclosed in the ITR originally filed by the petitioner on 04.01.2021. The same has been duly processed and refund of ` was also shown after processing under Section 143(1) of the Act The petitioner was served with a notice under Section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2024 with the assumption that he has received a . The notice mentioned that the petitioner assessee had not filed reply during proceedings under Section 133(6) of the sclosed income. It is the submission of the petitioner that the reply which had been filed by the petitioner answering to the specific aspect i.e. commission was on record and the same has been erroneously assumed to have not been application of mind. It is further submitted that the amount was already shown in his return, and therefore, there was no occasion for the respondents issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act as there was no income escaped or remained un-informed while processing the income tax return for A.Y. 2020-21. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Supreme Court ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass 103 ITR 437, to submit that reasons for determination of belief must have a rational connection or orming about the details of contractual In response, the petitioner filed reply including query no.6 22, he had received sales commission from which was duly offered for tax TR originally filed by the ` was also shown after processing under Section 143(1) of the Act of the Act on 31.03.2024 with the assumption that he has received a . The notice mentioned that the petitioner assessee had not filed reply during proceedings under Section 133(6) of the It is the submission of the petitioner that the reply which had been filed by the petitioner answering to the specific aspect i.e. commission was on record and the same has been erroneously assumed to have not been application of mind. It is further submitted that the amount was already shown in his return, and therefore, there was no occasion for the respondents issuing notice under Section 148 informed while Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Supreme Court , to submit that ional connection or VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 relevant bearing. Rational co nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of ITO and the formation of the belief that assessee. 8. return reflected the inclusion of the amount in its ITR been filed, reflecting that the same had been offered for tax as part of business turnover and the amount of tax accordingly, refund of which had been calculated, there was no occasion for issuing of notice under Section 148 of the Act. 9. instructions and examining the facts, it already filed. under Section 133(6) of the Act had asked the assessee to furnish information with regard 10. reply dated 16.01.2023, wherein specific response h to query no.6, which is as under: CWP No. 18951 of 2024 relevant bearing. Rational connection postulates that there has been a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of ITO and the formation of the belief that there had been escapement of income of the Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the return reflected the inclusion of the amount in its ITR been filed, reflecting that the same had been offered for tax as part of business turnover and the amount of tax accordingly, refund of which had been calculated, there was no occasion for issuing of notice under Section 148 of the Act. We had issued notices to the counsel for the Revenue and upon instructions and examining the facts, it has been born already filed. In fact, we find that the Assessing Officer while issuing notice under Section 133(6) of the Act had asked the assessee to furnish with regard to query no.6, which is as under: \"6. Give details of party-wise break and payment received in respect of Fees for professional or technical service.\" In response to the said notice, petitioner reply dated 16.01.2023, wherein specific response h to query no.6, which is as under:- \"6. With reference to party wise details of contractual receipts and fees for professional and technical services, it is submitted that assessee was only into business of Supply of electricity as well as Sale of medicines through his various proprietorship concerns and has not earned any contractual or fees for -3- postulates that there has been a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of ITO and the had been escapement of income of the Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the return reflected the inclusion of the amount in its ITR, and reply had also been filed, reflecting that the same had been offered for tax as part of business turnover and the amount of tax had also been deposited accordingly, refund of which had been calculated, there was no occasion for issuing of notice under Section 148 of the Act. to the counsel for the Revenue and upon has been borne out that reply was In fact, we find that the Assessing Officer while issuing notice under Section 133(6) of the Act had asked the assessee to furnish to query no.6, which is as under:- wise break-up for the contract receipts and payment received in respect of Fees for professional or In response to the said notice, petitioner- assessee had filed reply dated 16.01.2023, wherein specific response has been given in regard \"6. With reference to party wise details of contractual receipts and fees for professional and technical services, it is submitted that assessee was only into business of Supply of electricity as ell as Sale of medicines through his various proprietorship concerns and has not earned any contractual or fees for postulates that there has been a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of ITO and the had been escapement of income of the Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the and reply had also been filed, reflecting that the same had been offered for tax as part of also been deposited accordingly, refund of which had been calculated, there was no occasion for to the counsel for the Revenue and upon out that reply was In fact, we find that the Assessing Officer while issuing notice under Section 133(6) of the Act had asked the assessee to furnish up for the contract receipts and payment received in respect of Fees for professional or assessee had filed as been given in regard \"6. With reference to party wise details of contractual receipts and fees for professional and technical services, it is submitted that assessee was only into business of Supply of electricity as ell as Sale of medicines through his various proprietorship concerns and has not earned any contractual or fees for VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 professional or technical services. However, he had received AABCV8900E) of Rs.14,58,004/ 11. submits that despite providing exhaustive reply to each and every query, including query No.6, petitioner a notice dated 31.03.2024 (P 148 of the Act, has been issued erroneously, assuming that the petitioner assessee has include it in the taxable business turnover, nor filed a reply to the query. 12. for the Assessment Year 2020 No.998247251040121, wherein, the amount in question, Rs.14,58,004 has been disclosed as the gross receipt from the business/profession. submits that upon the issuance submission of a reply was sufficient for the revenue to satisfy itself by reviewing the relevant entry made in the ITR given in the reply to the notice. Therefore, issuance of the notice under Section 148 of the Act under the impression of escaping the assessment for the Assessment Year 2020 13. that even as per the so Verification Scheme, 2021, particularly, regarding ITR for A.Y. 2020 CWP No. 18951 of 2024 professional or technical services. However, he had received sales commission from UFO Moviez India Ltd. (PAN AABCV8900E) of Rs.14,58,004/ tax as part of business turnover disclosed in the ITR.\" Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner assessee further submits that despite providing exhaustive reply to each and every query, including query No.6, petitioner assessee has been served with the impugned notice dated 31.03.2024 (P-7), under Section 148 of the Act. Learned Senior counsel, thus, submits that notice under Section 148 of the Act, has been issued erroneously, assuming that the petitioner assessee has received the commission of Rs.14,58,004/ include it in the taxable business turnover, nor filed a reply to the query. Attention is drawn to the return filed by the petitioner assessee for the Assessment Year 2020-21, under ITR acknowl No.998247251040121, wherein, the amount in question, Rs.14,58,004 has been disclosed as the gross receipt from the business/profession. Therefore, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that upon the issuance of notice unde submission of a reply was sufficient for the revenue to satisfy itself by reviewing the relevant entry made in the ITR given in the reply to the notice. Therefore, issuance of the notice under n 148 of the Act under the impression of escaping the assessment for the Assessment Year 2020-21, is perverse and without application of mind. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner assessee also submits that even as per the so-called verification erification Scheme, 2021, particularly, regarding ITR for A.Y. 2020 -4- professional or technical services. However, he had received sales commission from UFO Moviez India Ltd. (PAN AABCV8900E) of Rs.14,58,004/- and the same was offered for tax as part of business turnover disclosed in the ITR.\" Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner assessee further submits that despite providing exhaustive reply to each and every query, ssessee has been served with the impugned 7), under Section 148 of the Act. Learned Senior counsel, thus, submits that notice under Section 148 of the Act, has been issued erroneously, assuming that the petitioner received the commission of Rs.14,58,004/-, and failed to include it in the taxable business turnover, nor filed a reply to the query. Attention is drawn to the return filed by the petitioner assessee 21, under ITR acknowledgment No.998247251040121, wherein, the amount in question, Rs.14,58,004 has been disclosed as the gross receipt from the business/profession. Therefore, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner - assessee notice under Section 133(6) of the Act, submission of a reply was sufficient for the revenue to satisfy itself by reviewing the relevant entry made in the ITR-3, along with the reference given in the reply to the notice. Therefore, issuance of the notice under n 148 of the Act under the impression of escaping the assessment for 21, is perverse and without application of mind. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner assessee also submits called verification done by the revenue under E- erification Scheme, 2021, particularly, regarding ITR for A.Y. 2020- 21, professional or technical services. However, he had received sales commission from UFO Moviez India Ltd. (PAN and the same was offered for Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner assessee further submits that despite providing exhaustive reply to each and every query, ssessee has been served with the impugned Learned Senior counsel, thus, submits that notice under Section 148 of the Act, has been issued erroneously, assuming that the petitioner , and failed to Attention is drawn to the return filed by the petitioner assessee edgment No.998247251040121, wherein, the amount in question, Rs.14,58,004 has assessee r Section 133(6) of the Act, submission of a reply was sufficient for the revenue to satisfy itself by 3, along with the reference given in the reply to the notice. Therefore, issuance of the notice under n 148 of the Act under the impression of escaping the assessment for Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner assessee also submits - 21, VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 related to the petitioner assessee, is factually incorrect. Despite, the submission of a reply to the notice, at point No.4, assigned in the verification report may not be happily worded said that the same are incorrect. 14. fact of the reply having been filed to notice under Section 133(6) and of the petitioner having reflected the alleged escaped income in his income tax return, still the respondents ins notice. 15. in Writ Petition No. 8594 of 2024 Tax Officer Ward 1 and another the Central Government is empow make a scheme of income tax in the official gazette for the purpose of collecting information under Section 133 information under Section 133 inspection under Section 134 of the Act or under Section 135 of the Act, however, the same has to be exercised with due caution and care. 16. 133(6) of the CWP No. 18951 of 2024 related to the petitioner assessee, is factually incorrect. Despite, the submission of a reply to the notice, at point No.4, \"4. The assessee has received commission of Rs. 14,58,004/- during the period under consideration and the TDS on the same has also been claimed by the assessee in the ITR. On this account, the assessee has not filed any reply, hence, further action is require issue of commission of Rs. 14,58,004/ While the learned senior counsel states that assigned in the verification report may not be happily worded said that the same are incorrect. Although the respondents have fact of the reply having been filed to notice under Section 133(6) the petitioner having reflected the alleged escaped income in his income tax return, still the respondents insist Almost in similar facts, the High Court of judicature of Bombay in Writ Petition No. 8594 of 2024 – Benaifer Vispi Patel vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1 and another decided on 15.07.2024 found the Central Government is empowered under Section 135A of the Act to make a scheme of income tax in the official gazette for the purpose of collecting information under Section 133B of the Act or for demanding the information under Section 133C of the Act, or by exercising power of inspection under Section 134 of the Act or under Section 135 of the Act, however, the same has to be exercised with due caution and care. While the petitioner was served with a notice under Section ) of the Act in the present case and reply was filed, the reply was -5- related to the petitioner assessee, is factually incorrect. Despite, the submission of a reply to the notice, at point No.4, respondents state that:- The assessee has received commission of during the period under consideration and the TDS on the same has also been claimed by the assessee in the ITR. On this account, the assessee has not filed any reply, hence, further action is required on the issue of commission of Rs. 14,58,004/-.\" counsel states that the reasons assigned in the verification report may not be happily worded, it cannot be not been able to controvert the fact of the reply having been filed to notice under Section 133(6) of the Act the petitioner having reflected the alleged escaped income in his ist of having rightly issued the Almost in similar facts, the High Court of judicature of Bombay Benaifer Vispi Patel vs The Income decided on 15.07.2024 found that while ered under Section 135A of the Act to make a scheme of income tax in the official gazette for the purpose of of the Act or for demanding the of the Act, or by exercising power of inspection under Section 134 of the Act or under Section 135 of the Act, however, the same has to be exercised with due caution and care. While the petitioner was served with a notice under Section Act in the present case and reply was filed, the reply was related to the petitioner assessee, is factually incorrect. Despite, the The assessee has received commission of during the period under consideration and the TDS on the same has also been claimed by the assessee in the ITR. On this account, the assessee has not d on the reasons t cannot be not been able to controvert the of the Act the petitioner having reflected the alleged escaped income in his the Almost in similar facts, the High Court of judicature of Bombay Benaifer Vispi Patel vs The Income that while ered under Section 135A of the Act to make a scheme of income tax in the official gazette for the purpose of of the Act or for demanding the of the Act, or by exercising power of inspection under Section 134 of the Act or under Section 135 of the Act, While the petitioner was served with a notice under Section Act in the present case and reply was filed, the reply was VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 ignored stating that the same has not been filed. information may not have been received in the electronic mechanism system which is also pro actually been filed, it would be make the assessee face the cumbersome proceedings under Section 148 of the Act. 17. filed and the amount having escaped from income tax assessed, we are satisfied that the said amount was already recorded and included in the ITR for the AY 2020 Officer and it was offered for tax as part of bu satisfied that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act in the present case has been issued without application of mind and stands vitiated on that count. law. 18. by the ACIT Central Karnal and the notices issued under Section 133 (6) Section 148 He, therefore, was judgment passed India and others provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative CWP No. 18951 of 2024 stating that the same has not been filed. information may not have been received in the electronic mechanism system which is also prone to errors, once it has co actually been filed, it would be wholly unjustified to allow the make the assessee face the cumbersome proceedings under Section 148 of Having proceeded on a presumption that reply not having been and the amount having escaped from income tax assessed, we are satisfied that the said amount was already recorded and included in the ITR for the AY 2020-21 and the same was duly Officer and it was offered for tax as part of bu satisfied that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act in the present case has been issued without application of mind and stands vitiated on that count. The proceedings initiated, therefore, We also find that the notice dated 31.03.2024 has been issued by the ACIT Central Karnal and the notices issued under Section 133 (6) Section 148 of the Act were issued by the jurisdictional , therefore, was also not competent to issue judgment passed in CWP No.21509 of 2023 India and others, decided on 29.07.2024, wherein it has been “16. 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 -6- stating that the same has not been filed. In circumstances where the information may not have been received in the electronic mechanism system to errors, once it has come on record that reply had unjustified to allow the Revenue to make the assessee face the cumbersome proceedings under Section 148 of Having proceeded on a presumption that reply not having been and the amount having escaped from income tax assessed, we are satisfied that the said amount was already recorded and included in the ITR 21 and the same was duly processed by the Assessing Officer and it was offered for tax as part of business turnover. We are satisfied that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act in the present case has been issued without application of mind and stands vitiated he proceedings initiated, therefore, are not sustainable in We also find that the notice dated 31.03.2024 has been issued by the ACIT Central Karnal and the notices issued under Section 133 (6) and of the Act were issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. to issue the same in view of the CWP No.21509 of 2023 - Jasjit Singh vs. Union of wherein it has been held as under: “16. 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 ncial implications are required to be In circumstances where the information may not have been received in the electronic mechanism system me on record that reply had evenue to make the assessee face the cumbersome proceedings under Section 148 of Having proceeded on a presumption that reply not having been and the amount having escaped from income tax assessed, we are satisfied that the said amount was already recorded and included in the ITR by the Assessing We are satisfied that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act in the present case has been issued without application of mind and stands vitiated not sustainable in We also find that the notice dated 31.03.2024 has been issued and fficer. in view of the Jasjit Singh vs. Union of “16. 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 ncial implications are required to be VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices dated follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present Therefore, on both the We, accordingly, quash the impugned notice and 06.01.2023 issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act, consequential notice dated 31.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the CWP No. 18951 of 2024 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 o 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 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 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. 19. The respondents-revenue would be, howeve 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.” Therefore, on both the counts, we find the notices are not sustainable in law. We, accordingly, quash the impugned notice and 06.01.2023 issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act, consequential notice dated 31.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the -7- 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 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 n 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 e 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 30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction. revenue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present the notices are not sustainable in law. We, accordingly, quash the impugned notices dated 16.12.2022, 26.12.2022 and 06.01.2023 issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act, consequential notice dated 31.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act and any further 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 wn 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 and for their 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 n 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 e 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 30.03.2023 and order r, at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and All the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present the notices are not sustainable in law. dated 16.12.2022, 26.12.2022 and 06.01.2023 issued under Section 133 (6) of the Act, consequential notice Act and any further VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment CWP No. 18951 of 2024 proceedings which same. 19. 20. 21. (SANJAY VASHISHT) JUDGE 19.09.2024 vs Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable CWP No. 18951 of 2024 proceedings which the respondents may have The writ petition is allowed. All pending applications shall stand disposed of. No costs. (SANJAY VASHISHT) (SANJEEV JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No -8- have undertaken on the basis of the All pending applications shall stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No on the basis of the VARINDER SINGH 2024.09.20 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment "