Jagmohan Sing n Singh Panaich Income Tax Of ax Officer V/s ioner & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ CORAM: HO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK HO SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ALOK JAIN Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate and Present: M Mr. Dewangana Chhillar, Advocat M dvocate for the petitioner. M Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standi for the respondent-Income Tax De Standing Counsel ax Department. ***** ** SANJEEV PRA PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral)

#2. Notice of motion. No Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standi M e on Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the re the respondent-Income Tax Departme partment.

#3. Both the counsel are ad idem Bo m that the issue involved in the present petition etition stands finally examined and co P and concluded by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. , vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29. on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate rdinate Bench in CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as d as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. , vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.0 n 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Sin it Singh (supra) held as under: “16. We are in agreement with t “ ith the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold tha Co that such circular or instructions by the Board could no ld not have been issued to override statutory provisions or to or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactment ments having financial PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-25953-20 2024 (O&M) implications are required to be f be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the the powers contained in Sections 119 and 120 of the Ac Se e Act, 1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the au Se e authorities cannot be allowed to usurp the legal prov provisions to their own satisfaction and convenience cau causing hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion usion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory prov provisions and for their implementation.

#17. In view of the aforesaid dis 17 discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or take take a different view as suggested by the learned counsel nsel for the revenue from what has already been held by the the Coordinate Bench.

#18. Keeping in view the law 18 law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notice Co otices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of u the A e Act, 1961 and proceedings initiated thereafter wi er without conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged ged under Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found und to be contrary to the provisions of the Act, 1961 and and accordingly notices dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023 023, 20.03.2024 and

30.03.2023 and order dated 30.03 30

30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction.

#19. The respondents-revenue wo 19 would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure as e as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly Ac ingly, if so advised.

#20. All the writ petitions are a 20 re allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall st all stand merged with the present order.” PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-25953-20 2024 (O&M)

#4. Keeping in view above, we all Ke allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms terms. The observations and order pa passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the to the present case. Accordingly, noti y, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Off g Officer u/s 148 dated 28.03.20 .03.2023 (Annexure P-4) and all consequential p ntial proceedings are set aside.

#5. All pending applications also stand Al stand disposed of accordingly. [SANJEEV JEEV PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE October 04, 20 Parul 2024 [ALOK JAIN] JUDGE Whether speakin Whether Report eaking / reasoned portable : : Ye Yes Yes Ye / No / No PARUL 2024.10.14 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document