RIA GOENKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), FARIDABAD AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/11856/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01066473202510 September 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, in its order dated 10.09.2026, has decided to dispose of the writ petition CWP-11856-2025 (Ria Goenka Vs. Income Tax Officer and others) in accordance with the detailed judgment passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 (Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others). Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi for Ria Goenka's case are not elaborated upon in this order. The operative directions would be to grant the relief, if any, as determined in the Jyoti Sareen case. Any pending miscellaneous applications have also been disposed of. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the decision was deferred to the connected case.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ria Goenka, has filed a writ petition (CWP-11856-2025) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Faridabad, and others. The judgment was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The High Court, in its order, has stated that the present writ petition is to be decided in terms of the detailed judgment passed in a connected case, CWP No.15791 of 2024, titled Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. All pending miscellaneous applications have also been disposed of.

What were the issues?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh was to decide the present writ petition. The judgment indicates that the decision in this case is contingent upon the decision in another writ petition, CWP No.15791 of 2024 (Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others). Therefore, the primary issue before the court was to determine the relief to be granted to the petitioner, Ria Goenka, based on the findings in the aforementioned connected case. The specific grounds or arguments presented by the petitioner and the revenue are not detailed in this short order, as it refers to a separate, more detailed judgment. The nature of the dispute and the assessment years are also not specified here.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11856-2025 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 RIA GOENKA ..... Petitioner Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), FARIDABAD AND OTHERS ..... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present : Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate Ms. Kritika Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel, Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel and Ms. Nikita Garg, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondents. * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. 1. For order see the detailed judgment of even date passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. 2. All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE 10.09.2026 (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) Jyoti 1

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No JYOTI SHARMA 2026.09.15 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →