CWP-21412-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Kumar Samra Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Sahil Jain, Advocate and Mr. for the Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Cousnel and Ms. Jaswinder Pridhi Sandhu, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department DEEPAK SIBAL Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 18.04.2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Office done because in terms of the notification 11), issued by the notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. 2. In support of petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: i. CWP India and others, 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.156 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21412 Date of Decision : Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Kumar Samra Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Sahil Jain, Advocate and Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Cousnel and Ms. Jaswinder Pridhi Sandhu, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department-respondents. *** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice 18.04.2024 (Annexure P-6) issued to the petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Office done because in terms of the notification dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P ), issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned ould have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. In support of his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: CWP-15745-2024, titled Jatinder Singh Bhangu India and others, decided on 19.07.2024; and p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 21412-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 29.07.2025 …Petitioner and others …Respondents DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Cousnel and Ms. Jaswinder Pridhi Sandhu, Advocate, respondents. Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice ) issued to the petitioner by the respondents under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary ground of challenge raised by the petitioner is that the impugned notice has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer which could have not been dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P- Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned ould have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. his afore submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court:- Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of decided on 19.07.2024; and VANDANA 2025.08.02 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21412-2025 ii. CWP others 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co Benches of this Court in 4. In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh dated 18.04.2024 Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. 5. The July 29, 2025 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable 2025 (O&M) CWP-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Singh others, decided on 29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that the case of the petitioner is covered in his through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co Benches of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra) 18.04.2024 (Annexure P-6), issued by the Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. The petition is allowed in the above terms. (DEEPAK SIBAL JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 5 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No p. 2 Singh Vs. Union of India and Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact is covered in his favour by the law laid down through the aforesaid two judgments rendered by two different co-ordinate Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh (supra). In the light of the above, in terms of the law laid down in (supra), the impugned notice ), issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against petition is allowed in the above terms. DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2025.08.02 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document