Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajesh Kumar Soni vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax … on 20 December, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Bench: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171662-DB
160
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-34982
34982-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision:
Decision:20.12.2024
RAJESH KUMAR SONI ........Petitioner(s)
(s)
V/s.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR
JALANDHAR-1 AND
ANOTHER
.........Respondent(s))
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Standing Counsel,
for the respondent/Income Tax Department.
*****
****
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral)
1. Notice of motion.
2. Mr. Ranvijay Singh,
Singh, Senior Standing Counsel, accepts notice on
behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department.
3. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the
present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in CWP
No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India aand others,,
decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.15745 of
2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others
others,,
decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) held as under:
“16. We are in agreement with the view taken by the
“16.
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 finan
financial
implications are required to be followed strictly and1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 11-01-2025 02:42:14 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171662-DBCWP-34982-2024
2024 (O&M)
Page 2 of 3mandatorily. 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 ow
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
30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside
for want of jurisdiction.
19. The respondents-revenue
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.”
4. Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the
aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis
2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 11-01-2025 02:42:15 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171662-DB
CWP-34982-2024
2024 (O&M)
Page 3 of 3
mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice dated 31.03.2024
(Annexure P–3) issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 and all consequential proceedings thereof are set
aside.
5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.
[SANJEEV
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
SHARMA]
JUDGE
[SANJAY
SANJAY VASHISTH
VASHISTH]
December 20,
20 2024 JUDGE
Ess Kay
Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes / No
Whether Reportable : Yes / No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 11-01-2025 02:42:15 :::