HARSARAN SINGH MAINI v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS
CWP/13796/2025 · 2026-09-10
Deepak Sibal, Lapita Banerji
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9293 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9293 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CWP-13796-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Harsaran Singh Maini Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Chandigarh others
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present : Mr. for the
Mr.Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate,
for the Income Tax Department
DEEPAK SIBAL
Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice dated 08.03.2025 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 done because in terms of the notification issued by the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the impugned notice could have been issued only by way of faceless assessment. 2. In support of his afore submission, petitioner places reliance on the following two judgments of this Court: i. CWP India and others, 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.138
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-1379 Date of Decision :
Harsaran Singh Maini
Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Chandigarh
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department-respondents. *** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)
Challenge made through the instant petition is to the notice .03.2025 (Annexure P-1) 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 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, 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 96-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 14.05.2025
…Petitioner
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2, Chandigarh and
…Respondents DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI 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-2), 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:- Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of decided on 19.07.2024; and VANDANA 2025.05.15 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-13796-2025
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 Bhangu dated 08.03.2025 Officer, is hereby quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
5.
The petition is allowed in the above terms.
May 14, 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 enches 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) .03.2025 (Annexure P-1), 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
JUDGE
5
ther speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No Jasjit 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 The petition is allowed in the above terms.
DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE
(LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE
VANDANA 2025.05.15 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document