CWP-21459-20224 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 119 IN THHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARRH CWP-21459-2024 (O&M)) Date of Decision: 30.08.20244 DARSHAN RREKHI . . . . Petitionerr Vs. INCOME TAAX OFFICER AND OTHERS . . . . Respondentss **** CORAM: HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANNJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HHON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RIITU TAGORE **** Present: MMr. B.M. Monga, Advocate withh MMr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate ffor the petitioner. MMr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standingg Counsel with MMr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Coounsel ffor the respondents/Revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Yoogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counnsel accepts notice on behalf off responddents/Revenue. 3. Both thhe counsel are ad idem that thee issue involved in the presentt petitionn stands finally examined and cooncluded by this Court in CWPP No.215509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singhh vs. Union of India and others,, decidedd on 29.07.2024, and by thee Coordinate Bench in CWPP No.157745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Sinngh Bhangu vs. Union of Indiaa and othhers, decided on 19.07.2024. Thhis Court in Jasjit Singh (supra)) held as under: MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21459-20224 (O&M) Page 2 of 3

“16. We are in agreemennt with the view taken bby the Coordinate Bench and holld that such circular or i nstructions by the Board could nnot have been issued to ooverride statutory provisions or tto make them otiose or oobsolete. Legislative enactmennts having financial i mplications are required to be followed strictly and mmandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in SSections 119 and 120 of the AAct, 1961 as well as SSection 144B (7 & 8), the aauthorities cannot be aallowed to usurp the legal proovisions to their own ssatisfaction and convenience caausing hardship to the aassessees. It also leaves confusioon in the minds of the ttaxpayers. In the opinion of thhis Court, instructions aand circulars can be issued onnly for the purpose of ssupplementing the statutory proovisions and for their i mplementation. 17. In view of the aforesaaid discussion, there is nno occasion to distinguish or taake a different view as ssuggested by the learned counseel for the revenue from wwhat has already been held by thhe Coordinate Bench.

18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the CCoordinate Bench (supra), noticces issued by the JAO uunder Section 148 of the Act, 19661 and the proceedings i nitiated thereafter without connducting the faceless aassessment as envisaged underr Section 144B of the AAct, 1961, have been found too be contrary to the pprovisions of the Act, 1961 an d accordingly notices ddated 28.02.2023, 16.03.20223, 20.03.2024 and 330.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside ffor want of jurisdiction. MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21459-20224 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 19. The respondents-revennue would be, however, aat liberty to follow the procedurre as laid down under tthe Act, 1961 and proceed accorddingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitionns are allowed. The i nterim order passed by the Couurt shall stand merged wwith the present order.” 4. Keepinng in view above, we allow thiss Writ Petition in the aforesaidd terms. The observations and order paassed above shall apply mutatiss mutanddis to the present case. Accoordingly, notice issued by thee Jurisdicctional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated 14.03.2024, andd consequuential proceedings are set asidee. 5. All pennding applications also stand dispposed of accordingly. (SANJJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (RITU TAGORE) JUDGE August 30, 20224 Mohit goyal 1. Whethe r speaking/reasoned? YYes/No 2. Whethe r reportable? YYes/No MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33

I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-21459-20224 (O&M) Page 1 of 3 119 IN THHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARRH CWP-21459-2024 (O&M)) Date of Decision: 30.08.20244 DARSHAN RREKHI . . . . Petitionerr Vs. INCOME TAAX OFFICER AND OTHERS . . . . Respondentss **** CORAM: HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANNJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HHON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RIITU TAGORE **** Present: MMr. B.M. Monga, Advocate withh MMr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate ffor the petitioner. MMr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standingg Counsel with MMr. Vaibhav Gupta, Standing Coounsel ffor the respondents/Revenue. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)) 1. Notice of motion. 2. Mr. Yoogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counnsel accepts notice on behalf off responddents/Revenue. 3. Both thhe counsel are ad idem that thee issue involved in the presentt petitionn stands finally examined and cooncluded by this Court in CWPP No.215509 of 2023 titled as Jasjit Singhh vs. Union of India and others,, decidedd on 29.07.2024, and by thee Coordinate Bench in CWPP No.157745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Sinngh Bhangu vs. Union of Indiaa and othhers, decided on 19.07.2024. Thhis Court in Jasjit Singh (supra)) held as under: MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21459-20224 (O&M) Page 2 of 3

“16. We are in agreemennt with the view taken bby the Coordinate Bench and holld that such circular or i nstructions by the Board could nnot have been issued to ooverride statutory provisions or tto make them otiose or oobsolete. Legislative enactmennts having financial i mplications are required to be followed strictly and mmandatorily. By exercising the powers contained in SSections 119 and 120 of the AAct, 1961 as well as SSection 144B (7 & 8), the aauthorities cannot be aallowed to usurp the legal proovisions to their own ssatisfaction and convenience caausing hardship to the aassessees. It also leaves confusioon in the minds of the ttaxpayers. In the opinion of thhis Court, instructions aand circulars can be issued onnly for the purpose of ssupplementing the statutory proovisions and for their i mplementation. 17. In view of the aforesaaid discussion, there is nno occasion to distinguish or taake a different view as ssuggested by the learned counseel for the revenue from wwhat has already been held by thhe Coordinate Bench.

18. Keeping in view the law laid down by the CCoordinate Bench (supra), noticces issued by the JAO uunder Section 148 of the Act, 19661 and the proceedings i nitiated thereafter without connducting the faceless aassessment as envisaged underr Section 144B of the AAct, 1961, have been found too be contrary to the pprovisions of the Act, 1961 an d accordingly notices ddated 28.02.2023, 16.03.20223, 20.03.2024 and 330.03.2023 and order dated 30.03.2023, are set aside ffor want of jurisdiction. MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21459-20224 (O&M) Page 3 of 3 19. The respondents-revennue would be, however, aat liberty to follow the procedurre as laid down under tthe Act, 1961 and proceed accorddingly, if so advised. 20. All the writ petitionns are allowed. The i nterim order passed by the Couurt shall stand merged wwith the present order.” 4. Keepinng in view above, we allow thiss Writ Petition in the aforesaidd terms. The observations and order paassed above shall apply mutatiss mutanddis to the present case. Accoordingly, notice issued by thee Jurisdicctional Assessing Officer u/s 148 dated 14.03.2024, andd consequuential proceedings are set asidee. 5. All pennding applications also stand dispposed of accordingly. (SANJJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (RITU TAGORE) JUDGE August 30, 20224 Mohit goyal 1. Whethe r speaking/reasoned? YYes/No 2. Whethe r reportable? YYes/No MOHIT GOYAL 2024.08.31 12:33

I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document