CWP/18614/2025 of PUNEET PANNU Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026

CWP-18614-2

IN THE Puneet Pannu Income Tax O

CORAM : H

H

Present : M fo

M

M M

fo

DEEPAK SIB

C dated 05.04.20 under Section challenge rais issued by the done because i issued by the notice could ha

2. In petitioner plac i. CWP India 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.135

E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH

CWP-1861 Date of De

Versus fficer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh an

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate or the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Stand Mr. Vaibhav Gupta and Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing C or the Income Tax Department-re *** BAL, J. (Oral)

Challenge made through the ins 024 (Annexure P-1) issued to the 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1 ed by the petitioner is that th Jurisdictional Assessing Office in terms of the notification dated Ministry of Finance, Governm ave been issued only by way of f n support of his afore submiss es reliance on the following two P-15745-2024, titled Jatinder S a and others, decided on 19.07.2

B AND HARYANA AT H 14-2025 (O&M) ecision : 09.07.2025

…Petitioner

nd others

…Respondents AK SIBAL A BANERJI ding Counsel and ounsels espondents. stant petition is to the notice e petitioner by the respondents 1961. The primary ground of e impugned notice has been er which could have not been d 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2), ment of India, the impugned faceless assessment. sion, learned counsel for the o judgments of this Court:- Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of 2024; and VANDANA 2025.07.11 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-18614-2

ii. CWP other

3. L that the case o through the af Benches of thi

4. In Jatinder Sing dated 05.04.20 Officer, is here the petitioner i

5. T

July 09, 2025 vandana

Whether speak Whether repor 2025 (O&M) P-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Sin rs, decided on 29.07.2024. earned counsel for the responde of the petitioner is covered in his foresaid two judgments rendered is Court in Jatinder Singh Bhan n the light of the above, in ter gh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( 024 (Annexure P-1), issued by eby quashed with liberty to the r in accordance with law. he petition is allowed in the abov

(DEEPA

J (LAPIT

J

king/reasoned :

Yes/No rtable :

Yes/No gh Vs. Union of India and ents does not dispute the fact s favour by the law laid down d by two different co-ordinate ngu and Jasjit Singh (supra). rms of the law laid down in (supra), the impugned notice y the Jurisdictional Assessing respondents to proceed against ve terms. AK SIBAL) JUDGE

TA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2025.07.11 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document