Punjab Tempo Union Banur vs Union Of India And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 4695 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Punjab Tempo Union Banur vs Union Of India And Others on 3 November, 2025

Author: Deepak Sibal

Bench: Deepak Sibal

              CWP-32353-2025
                        2025 (O&M)

                                              Sr. No.140 2nd case

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                       CHANDIGARH

                                                     CWP-3235353-2025 (O&M)
                                                     Date of Decision : 03.11.2025

              Punjab Tempo Union                                            ...Petitioner

                                                     Versus
              Union of India and others
                                                                            ...Respondents

              CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
                               HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

              Present :        Mr. Armaan Cajla, Advocate and
                               Mr
                               Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate
                               for the petitioner..
                                       petitioner.

                      Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Counsel
                      for the respondent-Income
                              respondent Income Tax Department.
                             ***
              DEEPAK SIBAL,
                     SIBAL J. (Oral)

Challenge in the present petition is to nnotice dated 31.03.2023

issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ''1961

Act'), and all consequential proceedings for the Assessment year 2019-

2020,, on the ground that Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the

same, in view of circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT,

wherein, it has been specifically enumerated tha that National Faceless

Assessment Centre (NFAC) has exclusive power to issue notice under

Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue

involved in the present writ petition is covered by judgment passed by a co co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu Vs.

Union of India and others, others, passed in CWP No.15745 No.15745-2024 and connected

matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh Vs. Union of India and

others (CWP No.21509 of 2023 and other connect connected matters), decided on

CWP-32353-2025 2025 (O&M)

29.07.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that

petitioner has preferred an appeal and same is pending before Appellate

Authority.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has also not

disputed the same.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

file with their able assistance.

5. A co-ordinate co ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu's

case (supra) and Jasjit Singh's case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on

the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to

the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and

proceed accordingly, if so advised. Relevant portion of decision dated

19.07.2024 in Jatinder Singh Bhagu's case (sup (supra) reads as under:-

"15. From the perusal of Section 151A, it is quite evident that scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of show cause notice under Section 148 as well as 148A. Clause 3 (b) of notification dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A clearly provides that scheme would be applicable to notice under Section 148. Even otherwise, it is a settled proposition of law that assessment proceedings commence from the stage of issuance of show cause notice. The object of introduction introduction of faceless assessment would be defeated if show cause notice under Section 148 is issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The respondents are heavily placing reliance upon office memorandum and letter issued by departmental authorities. It is axiomatic in tax jurisprudence that circulars, instructions and letters issued by Board or any other authority cannot override statutory provisions. The circulars are binding upon authorities and Courts are not bound by circulars. The mandate of Sectio Section 144B, 151A read with notification dated 29.03.2022 issued there under is quite

CWP-32353-2025 2025 (O&M)

lucid. There is no ambiguity in the language of statutory provisions, thus, office memorandum or any other instruction issued by Board or any other authority cannot be relied upon."

6. As appeal in the present proceedings is pending before the

Appellate Authority, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the

Appellate Authority to decide the same in terms of Jatinder Singh

Bhangu's case (supra), (sup decided on 19.07.2024 2024 and Jasjit Singh's case

(supra), decided on 29.07.2024.

7. All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of

accordingly.

(DEEPAK DEEPAK SIBAL SIBAL) JUDGE

(LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE

November 03, 03 2025 vandana

Whether ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No