SH VED PRAKASH vs. THE INITIATING OFFICER ACIT BPU LUDHIANA AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
CWP/13563/2026HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01071257202626 August 2026Bench: JUSTICE (TO BE NOMINATED),MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed the writ petition filed by Sh Ved Prakash (CWP-13563-2026). The Court's decision to dismiss the main case was based on the reasoning provided in a separate, concurrently decided writ petition, CWP-17064-2026, titled ‘Sh Manik Seth and Others vs. The Initiating Officer BPU Ludhiana and Another’. The specific findings or ratio decidendi from the referred judgment are not elaborated upon in the provided text. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition. No issues were expressly left undecided, as the petition was dismissed outright.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sh Ved Prakash, filed a writ petition (CWP-13563-2026) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Initiating Officer, ACIT BPU Ludhiana, and another. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order or action under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that an application (CM-10895-CWP-2026) to place something on record was allowed, subject to just exceptions. The main case, however, was dismissed. The dismissal was based on the reasoning provided in a separate, contemporaneously decided case, CWP-17064-2026 titled ‘Sh Manik Seth and Others vs. The Initiating Officer BPU Ludhiana and Another'. Any pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner, Sh Ved Prakash, is maintainable and warrants relief from the High Court. (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner, through their counsel, presented arguments before the High Court. The specific grounds or arguments are not detailed in the provided text. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, represented by Senior Standing Counsel and Junior Standing Counsel, also presented their arguments. The specific grounds or arguments are not detailed in the provided text. The judgment does not record the specific contentions of either party but indicates that arguments were heard.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

289 + 117 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

CWP-13563-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.08.2026 SH VED PRAKASH ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS THE INITIATING OFFICER ACIT BPU LUDHIANA AND ANR. ….RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Nitin Kanwar, Advocate, Mr. Dushyant Nayak, Advocate, Mr. Rajiv Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Shivam Jain, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel and Ms. Nikita Garg, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent(s)-Income Tax Department. ***** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral) CM-10895-CWP-2026 (placing on record) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Main Case (O&M) 2. Dismissed. For reasons, see order of even date passed in CWP-17064-2026 titled as ‘Sh Manik Seth and Others vs. The Initiating Officer BPU Ludhiana and Another’. 3. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. [ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA] ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE [ROHIT KAPOOR]

JUDGE AUGUST 26, 2026 Rahul Joshi 1. Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2. Whether Reportable Yes/No RAHUL JOSHI 2026.09.01 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →