Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/18090/2025 of HARPREET WALIA SABHARWAL Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER OSD WARD MOHALI 1 AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 140 CWP-18090-2025 Date of decision: 04.07.2025 Harpreet Walia Sabharwal ...Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer (OSD) Ward Mohali-1, Chandigarh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 04.07.2025
Harpreet Walia Sabharwal
...Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer (OSD) Ward Mohali-1, Chandigarh and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present:
Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing counsel
for the respondent.
****
SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Challenge in the present petition is to notice dated 09.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961) and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present 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 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.
3. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not Gaurav Arora 2025.07.14 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 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 09.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and all consequential actions, for AY 2019-2020 on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, 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. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of, in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra), decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), decided on 29.07.2024.
8. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (LISA GILL) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
JUDGE JUDGE 04.07.2025 Gaurav Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2025.07.14 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document