KHEM GUPTA (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/16120/2026HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01083424202611 August 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, at this stage, disposed of the writ petition without commenting on the merits of the case. It directed respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the representation dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) submitted by the petitioner. This decision was to be made by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The decision was to be communicated to the petitioner, who would be at liberty to challenge it if it was not to his satisfaction. The principle established is that in such circumstances, the court can direct the statutory authority to decide a pending representation expeditiously and in accordance with law, without adjudicating the underlying dispute.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Khem Gupta (since deceased) through his legal heir, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer and others. The petitioner sought a direction for respondent No. 1 to decide a representation dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) submitted by the petitioner. The counsel for the respondents had no objection to this prayer. The High Court, without commenting on the merits, disposed of the writ petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the Income Tax Officer to decide the petitioner's representation dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner's counsel submitted that he would be satisfied if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the representation dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-5). Revenue's Contention: Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 4 had no objection if the prayer made by the petitioner was accepted.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.122 CWP-16120-2026 Date of decision : 11.08.2026 KHEM GUPTA (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR

.…. Petitioner Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

Present : Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amanpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 to 4. * * * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J

. (Oral)

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage, he would be satisfied if the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the representation dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) submitted by the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 4, who appears on advance notice, has no objection if the above prayer is accepted. 3. Accordingly, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the representation dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) submitted by the petitioner, by passing a speaking order and after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within 03 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 4. Needless to add that the decision so taken be communicated to the petitioner and if the decision is not to the satisfaction of the petitioner, he would be at liberty to challenge the same, in accordance with law. [DEEPAK SIBAL] JUDGE 11.08.2026 [RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL] pry

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No PRIYANKA 2026.08.14 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →