GURU AMARJIT SINGH HUF THROUGH ITS KARTA SH AMARINDER SODHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CWP/6267/2026HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01034523202614 September 2026Author: MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the impugned order dated 15.01.2026, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, was indeed violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the specific directions issued by the Court in its order dated 04.11.2025. The Court noted that while the earlier order directed the determination of the refund after granting an opportunity of hearing, the subsequent order was passed without providing such an opportunity to the petitioner. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order dated 15.01.2026. The matter was remitted back to the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, to decide the issue afresh in terms of the directions issued by the High Court in its order dated 04.11.2025, ensuring that the needful is done within three months from the receipt of the copy of the present order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Guramrit Singh (HUF), filed a writ petition (CWP No. 7797 of 1996) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana concerning the payment of refund of wealth tax along with interest. This petition was disposed of on 04.11.2025 with directions to the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Jalandhar, to pass an appropriate order treating the petition as a representation and determine the refund due, granting an opportunity of hearing to both parties. The exercise was to be completed within three months. Subsequently, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, passed an order dated 15.01.2026 regarding the refund. However, the petitioner alleged that no opportunity of hearing was granted prior to this order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order dated 15.01.2026 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, is violative of the principles of natural justice and the specific directions issued by the High Court in its order dated 04.11.2025, concerning the grant of an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before determining the refund of wealth tax and interest. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without affording them an opportunity of hearing, which contravened the principles of natural justice and the specific directions of the High Court. They relied on the High Court's earlier order which explicitly mandated a hearing. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue. It only notes that the Principal Commissioner passed the order dated 15.01.2026.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN (Sr. No. 182) Guru Am Principal CORAM Present : DEEPAK (1) the petitio responden No.7797 this Court N THE HIGH COURT OF P AT CHANDI marjit Singh (HUF) Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, M : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Mr. Rohit Sud, Advocate and Mr. Sameesh Bassi, Advocat Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior S Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Junior Sta the respondent(s)-Income Ta * * * K SIBAL, J. (Oral) The issue with regard to pay oner along with interest, if any nts, the petitioner approached t of 1996, which petition was di t on 04.11.2025 through issuance “In view of the aforesaid f petition is disposed of with a Wealth Tax, Jalandhar to pas this petition as representation question of refund to the asses of the assessee and the Reven hearing. Such exercise be conc from the date of receipt of copy PUNJAB & HARYANA IGARH CWP No.6267 of 2026 Date of decision : 14.09.2026 .....Petitio Jalandhar-1 and others ` .....Responde E DEEPAK SIBAL E SUNISH BINDLISH d te for the petitioner. Standing Counsel and anding Counsel for ax Department. yment of refund of the wealth tax y, having not been decided by this Court through filing of CW isposed of by a Division Bench e of the following directions :-- facts and circumstances, the present a direction to the Commissioner of ss an appropriate order by treating n of the assessee and determine the ssee, if any due. The representatives nue shall be given an opportunity of cluded within a period of 03 months y of this order.” 6 oner ents x to the WP h of f f SUNIL YADAV 2026.09.18 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

CWP No.

(2)

question o grant of o However, Commissi dated 15. opportuni order not the specif (3)

aside and Jalandhar quoted di CWP No. (4)

14.09.

202 sunil yadav

Wh

Wh .6267 of 2026 [2] As per the afore quoted di of refund was required to be de opportunity of hearing to the pet , though the issue of refund ioner of Income Tax, Jalandh .01.2026 but admittedly, prior ity of hearing was granted to the only violative of principles of fic directions issued by this Cour In the light of the above, the d the matter is remitted to Princi r-1 to take up and decide the m irections issued by this Court t 7797 of 1996. The needful be d Disposed of.

26

( v

hether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No hether reportable : Yes / No rections issued by this Court, etermined by the respondents a titioner/petitioner’s representativ d was decided by the Princi har-1 through the impugned or to the passing of such order e petitioner rendering the impugn natural justice but also contrary rt. e impugned order 15.01.2026 is ipal Commissioner of Income T matter afresh in terms of the af through order dated 04.11.2025 done within three months. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE ( SUNISH BINDLISH ) JUDGE o o

the fter ves. ipal rder no ned y to set Tax, fore 5 in SUNIL YADAV 2026.09.18 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →