M Mr. Ajit Kumar Jha, Advocate for cate with ate for & Ors. v. Union of India and othe others

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ CORAM: HO HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJ HO SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA JASJIT SINGH BEDI Ms. Monika Agarwal, Advocate w Present: M Mr. Ajit Kumar Jha, Advocate for M cate with ate for the petitioner. **** M Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standi for the respondents/Revenue. Standing Counsel (through VC) SANJEEV PR ral) V PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) ****

#1. Notice of tice of motion.

#2. Ms. Gau s. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing Co ing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respon respondents/Revenue.

#3. Both the th the counsel are ad idem that the at the issue involved in the present petition s tition stands finally examined and con P nd concluded by this Court in CWP No.2150 21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh v , ngh vs. Union of India and others, decided cided on 29.07.2024, and by the P the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.1574 15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Sing Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and othe others, decided on 19.07.2024. This upra) 4. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) held as u ld as under: MOHIT GOYAL 2024.12.03 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32450-2024 2024 (O&M) “16. We are in agreement ent with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench and hold hold 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 implications are required to be f be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the p 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 esaid discussion, there is no occasion to distinguish or tak 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 la e law laid down by the Coordinate Bench (supra), notice Co otices issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 1961 and the proceedings initiated thereafter without cond conducting the faceless assessment as envisaged under der Section 144B of the Act, 1961, have been found to Ac 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. MOHIT GOYAL 2024.12.03 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32450-2024 2024 (O&M)

#19. The respondents-revenu venue would be, however, at liberty to follow the procedure dure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordi ordingly, if so advised.

#20. All the writ petitions tions are allowed. The interim order passed by the Cour ourt shall stand merged with the present order.”

#4. Keeping eping in view above, we allow this this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. T ms. The observations and order pass r passed above shall apply mutatis mutand ndis to the present case. Accordin 2024 cordingly, notice dated 28.03.2024 issued u ued under Section 148 of the I the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Jurisdicti risdictional Assessing Officer as r as well as the consequential proceedi oceedings are set aside.

#5. All pend l pending applications also stand dispo disposed of accordingly. (SANJE ANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) ( JUDGE December 02, 2 Mohit goyal , 2024

#1. Whether 2. Whether ther speaking/reasoned? ther reportable? Ye Yes/No Yes/No Ye MOHIT GOYAL 2024.12.03 15:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document