Case Law Details
Rudra Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Punjab And Haryana High Court)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court decided a writ petition challenging a notice dated 28.06.2025 issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, along with all consequential proceedings for Assessment Year 2021-22. The petitioner contended that the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction in view of the CBDT notification/circular dated 29.03.2022, which specifically provided that the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) had the exclusive power to issue notices under Section 148 of the Act.
The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the issue raised in the writ petition was already covered by the judgments of a Coordinate Bench of the High Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others, decided on 19.07.2024 in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matters, and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others, decided on 29.07.2024 in CWP No. 21509 of 2023 and connected matters. Counsel for the respondents did not dispute that the issue was covered by those decisions.
After hearing the parties and examining the record, the High Court noted that the Coordinate Bench, in Jatinder Singh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh, had allowed the writ petitions on the same issue by granting liberty to the Revenue to follow the procedure prescribed under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and proceed in accordance with law, if so advised.
The Court reproduced the relevant portion of paragraph 15 of the judgment in Jatinder Singh Bhangu, which states that:
- From a reading of Section 151A, the scheme of faceless assessment is applicable from the stage of issuance of the show-cause notice under Sections 148 and 148A.
- Clause 3(b) of the notification dated 29.03.2022 issued under Section 151A clearly provides that the faceless assessment scheme applies to notices issued under Section 148.
- Assessment proceedings commence from the stage of issuance of the show-cause notice.
- The object of introducing faceless assessment would be defeated if the show-cause notice under Section 148 is issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
- The respondents’ reliance on office memoranda and departmental letters was not accepted, as circulars, instructions and letters issued by the Board or other authorities cannot override statutory provisions.
- While circulars are binding upon departmental authorities, courts are not bound by them.
- The mandate of Sections 144B and 151A, read with the notification dated 29.03.2022, was held to be clear and unambiguous, and office memoranda or other instructions issued by the Board or any other authority could not be relied upon in preference to the statutory provisions.
Following the above Coordinate Bench decisions, the High Court disposed of the present writ petition in terms of the judgments in Jatinder Singh Bhangu, decided on 19.07.2024, and Jasjit Singh, decided on 29.07.2024. All pending applications, if any, were also disposed of accordingly. The judgment was delivered on 25.07.2025.
Cases Discussed
Author Bio
