Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/37894/2025 of AVTAR SINGH Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 PATIALA AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-37894 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.12.2025 Avtar Singh ..... Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Patiala and others ..... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-37894 of 2025 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 23.12.2025
Avtar Singh
..... Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Patiala and others
..... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Present:
Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing Counsel
Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Jr. Standing Counsel
Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate
Ms. Muskaan Chauhan, Advocate
Ms. Tanya Kumar, Advocate
for respondents-Income Tax Department.
****
LISA GILL, 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 18.03.2025, passed under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act 1961’), notice for the Assessment Year 2022-2023 and all subsequent proceedings on the ground that Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, in view of circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive power to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. SANJAY KHAN
Chandigarh
2. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by 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. It is submitted that 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. Relevant portion of decision dated 19.07.2024 in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s case (supra) reads as under:- “15. From the perusal of Section 151A, it is quite evident that scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148 as well as 148A. Clause 3(b) of notification dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A clearly provides that scheme would be applicable to notice under Section 148. Even otherwise, it is a settled proposition of law that assessment proceedings commence from the stage of issuance of show cause notice. The object of introduction of faceless assessment would be defeated if show cause notice under Section 148 is issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The respondents are heavily placing reliance upon office memorandum and letter issued by departmental authorities. It is axiomatic in tax jurisprudence that circulars, instructions and letters SANJAY KHAN
Chandigarh issued by Board or any other authority cannot override statutory provisions. The circulars are binding upon authorities and Courts are not bound by circulars. The mandate of Section 144B, 151A readwith notification dated 29.03.2022 issued thereunder is quite lucid. There is no ambiguity in the language of statutory provisions, thus, office memorandum or any other instruction issued by Board or any other authority cannot be relied upon.”
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute that issue involved is covered in favour of petitioner in view of abovesaid decisions.
5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, 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.
6. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(LISA GILL)
JUDGE
(VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 23.12.2025
JUDGE s.khan Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SANJAY KHAN
Chandigarh