Case Law Details
Amarjit Kaur Vs Union of India And Others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
In Amarjit Kaur Vs Union of India and Others, the Punjab and Haryana High Court addressed the legality of circulars issued by the Income Tax Department that contradicted statutory provisions of the Income Tax Act. The court referenced its previous rulings in related cases, notably Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India, which established that the Income Tax Department’s circulars and instructions cannot override the statutory framework established by legislative enactments. The court emphasized that such circulars should only serve to supplement and facilitate the implementation of existing laws, not to undermine or nullify them.
The court found that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act were issued without adhering to the faceless assessment procedures mandated by Section 144B of the Act. Consequently, the notices and subsequent proceedings were deemed lacking in jurisdiction and were set aside. The ruling reinforces the principle that the authorities must act within the confines of the law and cannot unilaterally alter statutory requirements, which could lead to confusion and hardship for taxpayers. The High Court allowed the writ petition, thereby nullifying the disputed notices and affirming the necessity for compliance with statutory provisions in all tax-related processes.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
1. Notice of motion.
2. Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/Income Tax Department.
3. Both the counsel are ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition stands finally examined and concluded by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024, and by the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.15745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others , decided on 19.07.2024. This Court in Jasjit Singh (supra) held as 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 override statutory provisions or to make them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments having financial implications are required to be followed strictly and mandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in 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 hardship to the assessees. It also leaves confusion in the minds of the taxpayers. In the opinion of this Court, instructions and circulars can be issued only for the purpose of supplementing the statutory provisions and for their implementation.
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 been 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 dated 30.03.2023, are set aside for want of jurisdiction.
19. The respondents-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 allowed. The interim order passed by the Court shall stand merged with the present order.”
4. Keeping in view above, w e allow this Writ Petition in the aforesaid terms. The observations and order passed above shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated 23.03 .2024 (Annexure P-2), and consequential proceedings are set aside.
5. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.
Author Bio
