SAVITA JINDAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, in its order dated 10.09.2026, did not provide a specific ruling or reasoning for the case of Savita Jindal (CWP-11965-2025). Instead, it explicitly stated that the detailed judgment for this petition is to be found in another case, CWP No. 15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others, decided on the same date. Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, ratio decidendi, and operative directions for Savita Jindal's case are not discernible from this order alone, as they are incorporated by reference into another judgment. Any pending miscellaneous applications related to this petition were also disposed of.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Savita Jindal, filed a writ petition (CWP-11965-2025) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4) Faridabad and others. The judgment was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The High Court, in its order, stated that for the detailed judgment, reference should be made to another case, CWP No. 15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others, passed on the same date. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.
What were the issues?
The judgment does not explicitly state the specific questions of law or fact that the High Court had to decide in CWP-11965-2025. It is also not recorded what arguments were made by the petitioner or the respondents. The order simply directs that the detailed judgment is contained in a separate, but contemporaneously decided, writ petition (CWP No. 15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others). Therefore, the specific issues and contentions for this particular case are not detailed within this order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11965-2025 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 SAVITA JINDAL ..... Petitioner Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS ..... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present : Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate and 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 14:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Shivaraj M S vs. The Union Of INDIAKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
