251 IIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGAARH CCWP-12355-2024 (O&M) DDate of Decision: 03.10.2024 Mukesh Guptta …Petitioner Vs. Union of Indi a and others …Respondents CORAM: HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANNJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANNJAY VASHISTH Present MMr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate foor the petitioner. MMr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standinng Counsel for the revenue. *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)) 1. LLearned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the substantiall issue involvedd in the present petition stands ffinally examined and concludedd by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titleed as Jasjit Singh vs. Union off India and othhers, decided on 29.07.2024, annd by the Coordinate Bench inn CWP No.1574745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Sinngh Bhangu vs. Union of Indiaa and others, deecided on 19.07.2024. This Courrt in Jasjit Singh (supra) held ass under: ““16. We are in agreement with thhe view taken by the Coordinatee BBench and hold that such circullar or instructions by the Boardd ccould not have been issued to oveerride statutory provisions or to mmake them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments havingg ffinancial implications are requiired to be followed strictly andd mmandatorily. By exercising the poowers contained in Sections 1199 RAJESH KUMAR 2024.10.04 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. [2] CWP-12355-2024 (O&M)

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.” RAJESH KUMAR 2024.10.04 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab &

Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. [3] CWP-12355-2024 (O&M) 2. 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. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, dated 20.03.2024 and all consequential proceedings are set aside. 3. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 03.10.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2024.10.04 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

251 IIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGAARH CCWP-12355-2024 (O&M) DDate of Decision: 03.10.2024 Mukesh Guptta …Petitioner Vs. Union of Indi a and others …Respondents CORAM: HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANNJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANNJAY VASHISTH Present MMr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate foor the petitioner. MMr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standinng Counsel for the revenue. *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)) 1. LLearned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the substantiall issue involvedd in the present petition stands ffinally examined and concludedd by this Court in CWP No.21509 of 2023 titleed as Jasjit Singh vs. Union off India and othhers, decided on 29.07.2024, annd by the Coordinate Bench inn CWP No.1574745 of 2024 titled as Jatinder Sinngh Bhangu vs. Union of Indiaa and others, deecided on 19.07.2024. This Courrt in Jasjit Singh (supra) held ass under: ““16. We are in agreement with thhe view taken by the Coordinatee BBench and hold that such circullar or instructions by the Boardd ccould not have been issued to oveerride statutory provisions or to mmake them otiose or obsolete. Legislative enactments havingg ffinancial implications are requiired to be followed strictly andd mmandatorily. By exercising the poowers contained in Sections 1199 RAJESH KUMAR 2024.10.04 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. [2] CWP-12355-2024 (O&M)

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.” RAJESH KUMAR 2024.10.04 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab &

Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. [3] CWP-12355-2024 (O&M) 2. 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. Accordingly, notice issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, dated 20.03.2024 and all consequential proceedings are set aside. 3. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 03.10.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2024.10.04 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.