INCOME TAX DEPARTEMT vs. RANINDER SINGH

CRM-M/14983/2019HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01036525201908 May 2026Author: MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the petitions with a direction that the trial court will decide the complaints filed by the petitioner/complainant afresh by taking into account all documents and material placed on record, including any additional documents. The Court clarified that the observations and findings of the revisional Court recorded in its order dated 27.11.2018 will not have any bearing on the fresh adjudication, which will be decided on its own merits. The principle established is that when parties agree to a remand for fresh consideration, the appellate court should direct the lower court to decide the matter de novo, without being influenced by prior observations, ensuring a fair and independent adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Department (petitioner) filed three criminal complaints (COMA/11983/2016, COMA/1885/2016, and COMA/122412/2016) against Raninder Singh and Amarinder Singh (respondents). The trial court, by orders dated 07.03.2017, 19.03.2016, and 27.11.2018, directed the respondents to face trial. The Department then filed three revision petitions before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. The Additional Sessions Judge accepted the revisions, set aside the summoning orders, and remanded the complaints back to the trial court for fresh adjudication. The Department has now approached the High Court challenging these orders of the Additional Sessions Judge. The Department, through its counsel, has informed the Court via email dated 07.05.2026 that it has no objection to the complaints being considered afresh by the trial court, provided all contentions are kept open.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the petitions filed by the Income Tax Department challenging the revisional orders of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, which remanded the criminal complaints back to the trial court for fresh adjudication. Assessee's contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the respondents (Raninder Singh and Amarinder Singh). Revenue's contentions: The Income Tax Department (petitioner) has indicated that it has no objection to the complaints being considered afresh by the trial court, provided all rights and contentions, both on facts and in law, are expressly kept open. The Department is essentially seeking a direction for the trial court to decide the complaints on their own merits, taking into account all documents and additional documents, in accordance with law and expeditiously.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CRM-M-1498 IN T

201

1) CRM-M

Income Tax D Raninder Sing

2) CRM-M

Deputy Direct Raninder Sing

3) CRM-M

Income Tax D Amarinder Si

CORAM: H

Present:- M

M M

M fo

83-2019 with connected matter THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGA

D M-14983-2019 Department

Versus gh

M-15016-2019 tor of Income Tax

Versus gh

M-15062-2019 Department

Versus ingh

ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIB Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate (th Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Advocate, Mr. Vipul Joshi, Advocate, and Mr. Piyush Kumar, Advocate or the petitioner(s). Mr. Akshay Bhan, Senior Advoca Mr. Gurmohan Singh Bedi, Advo Mr. Pawandeep Singh, Advocate, Mr. Anand Vardhan Khanna, Adv rs

-1- AB AND HARYANA ARH Date of Decision:08.05.2026

…Petitioner(s)

…Respondent(s)

…Petitioner(s)

…Respondent(s)

…Petitioner(s)

…Respondent(s) BHUVAN DAHIYA hrough Video Conferencing), ate with cate,

vocate for the respondent(s).

- Aman Dua 2026.05.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

CRM-M-1498 TRIBHUVAN

T Chief Judicial (i) COMA/11 (ii) COMA/18 (iii) COMA/12 Considering th 24.04.2017 we trial, which we learned Additi setting aside th Court for fresh

L the Departmen as Annexure ‘A to fresh cons accordance wi Department, on 3. In the trial Court afresh by taki including the Observations a 27.11.2018, w decided on the 83-2019 with connected matter N DAHIYA, J. (Oral) he petitioner Department/com l Magistrate by filing three co 983/2016 titled Income Tax D 85/2016 titled Income Tax Depa 2412/2016 titled Income Tax D he same, summoning orders dat ere passed by the trial Court di ere challenged by them by filing ional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana; he summoning orders and reman h adjudication vide a common or earned counsel for the petitione nt vide email dated 07.05.2026, w A’. It is to the effect that the De sideration of the complaints a ith law, provided all rights and n facts as well as in law, are exp n view thereof, the petitions are d t will decide the complaints file ng into account all documents additional documents, in accor and findings of the revisional C will not have any bearing on eir own merits. rs

-2- mplainant approached learned omplaints - Criminal Case nos. Department v. Raninder Singh; artment v. Raninder Singh; and Department v. Amarinder Singh. ted 07.03.2017, 19.03.2016 and irecting the respondents to face g three revision petitions before the revisions were accepted by nding the complaints to the trial rder dated 27.11.2018. er has received instructions from which is retained on the case file epartment will have no objection and accompanying material in d contentions on behalf of the pressly kept open. disposed of with a direction that ed by the petitioner/complainant and material placed on record, rdance with law, expeditiously. ourt recorded in the order dated the complaints, which will be

- d . ; d . d e e y l m e n n e t t , . d e Aman Dua 2026.05.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

CRM-M-1498

Pe disposed of.

08.05.

2026 Payal/Ad

83-2019 with connected matter ending miscellaneous applicat A photocopy of this order be place

Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable rs

-3- tion(s), if any, also stand(s) ed on connected files. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)

JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No

- ) ) Aman Dua 2026.05.13 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →