Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sandeep Kumar Gupta vs Union Of India And Others on 14 August, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Bench: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:105284-DB
CWP-19857-2024
2024 (O&M)
Page 1 of 3
128
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP-19857-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 14.08.2024
.2024
SANDEEP KUMAR GUPTA
. . . . Petitioner
Vs.
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
. . . . Respondents
****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
****
Present: Mr Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate with
Mr.
Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Amanpreet (A.P.) Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel
Mr
for the respondents/Revenue.
****
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)
1. Notice of motion.
2. Mr.. Amanpreet (A.P.) Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice on
behalf of respondents/Revenue.
3. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present
petition stands finally adjudicated in view of the judgment passed by
this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union
others, decided on 29.07.2024, wherein this Court held as
of India and others,
under:
"16. We are in agreement with the view taken
by the Coordinate Bench and hold that such circular or
instructions by the Board could not have been issued to
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:105284-DB
CWP-19857-2024
2024 (O&M)
override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or
obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial be
followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the
followed
powers contained Sections 119 and 120 of the Act,
1961 as well as Section 144B (7 & 8), the authorities
cannot be allowed to usurp the legal provisions to their
own satisfaction and convenience causing hardshi
hardship to
the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of
the taxpayers instructions and supplementing the
statutory provisions and
17. In view of the aforesaid discussion, there is
no occasion to distinguish or take a different view as
suggested by the learned counsel for the revenue from
what has already been held by the Coordinate Bench.
18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the
Coordinate Bench (supra), notices issued by the JAO
under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and the proceedings
initiated thereafter without conducting the faceless
assessment as envisaged under Section 144B of the
Act, 1961, have beesn
bee n found to be contrary to the
provisions of the Act, 1961 and accordingly notices
dated 28.02.2023, 16.03.2023, 20.03.2024 and
30.03.2023 and order
order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside
for want of jurisdiction.
19. The respondents-revenue
revenue would be, however,
at liberty to follow the procedure as laid down under
the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.
20. All the writ petitions are allow
allowed. The
interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged
with the present order."
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:105284-DB
CWP-19857-2024
2024 (O&M)
4. Keeping in view above, we allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid
terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis
mutandis to the present case. Acco
Accordingly,
rdingly, notice u/s 148 dated
28.03.2024
.2024 and consequential proceedings are set aside.
5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.
(SANJEEV
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
SHARMA)
JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
August 14,, 2024
Mohit goyal
1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
2. Whether reportable? Yes/No
3 of 3
