AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    BALJIT SINGH v. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) AMRITSAR

    CWP-35181-2024 1

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

    CHANDIGARH

    116 CWP-35181-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision:-29.01.2025

    Baljit Singh ....Petitioner Vs.

    Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Amritsar ...Respondent

    CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

    Present: Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocates for the petitioner.

    Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate

    for the respondent-Union of India. ***

    SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

    1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 31.03.2023 (P-2) issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'Act 1961") and all consequential actions, as order dated 18.03.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Act, 1961, for A.Y 2016-2017, since the notice dated 31.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 was without jurisdiction and issued by 'JAO' instead of 'NFAC' .

    2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the above writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected

    1 of 3

    matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the Appellate Authority.

    3. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same.

    4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case.

    5. The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 31.03.2023 (P-2) issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and consequential actions, as order dated 18.03.2024 issued under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Act, 1961, for A.Y 2016-2017, since the notice dated 31.03.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 was without jurisdiction and should be issued by 'NFAC' instead of 'JAO', in view of the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

    6. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra) and Jasjit Singh's case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

    7. Since in the present case, the appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the

    2 of 3

    Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner, in terms of the judgments mentioned above.

    8. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

    (ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)

    JUDGE JUDGE

    29.01.2025

    Gaurav Arora Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

    3 of 3

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    BALJIT SINGH v. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) AMRITSAR
    (Jan 29, 2025)