CWP/22002/2024 of GURUBACHAN PAL SINGH Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA on 14 September 2026

1. N

2. M behalf of the r

3. B in the present CWP No.215 decided on 29 2024 titled a decided on 19 “ B c m IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA C D Pal Singh

Vs. Officer, ITO Ward-6(1), Ludhian

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN Mr. Sunil K. Mukhi, Advocate fo (through video conferencin ***

RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standi revenue. Both the counsel are ad idem tha petition stands finally examined 509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh 9.07.2024, and by the Coordina as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. 9.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Si “16. We are in agreement with th Bench and hold that such circul could not have been issued to ov make them otiose or obsolete. NJAB AND HARYANA ARH

Date of Decision: 03.09.2024

…Petitioner na

…Respondent NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH or the petitioner. ng)

) ing Counsel accepts notice on at the substantial issue involved d and concluded by this Court in h vs. Union of India and others, ate Bench in CWP No.15745 of . Union of India and others, Singh (supra) held as under: he view taken by the Coordinate lar or instructions by the Board verride statutory provisions or to Legislative enactments having

n d n , f , e d o g

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 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 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 mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 dated 23.03.2024 and all consequential proceedings are set aside.

5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE

(SANJAY VASHISTH)

JUDGE 03.09.2024 rajesh

1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No

2. Whether reportable?

: Yes/No