RAJ KUMAR GABA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/18809/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01103202202323 September 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court has not provided a decision on the merits of the case in this specific order. Instead, it has directed that the order for this petition will be the same as the detailed judgment passed in CWP No. 18800 of 2023 on the same date. This implies that the outcome and reasoning for Raj Kumar Gaba's petition are contingent upon the decision in the Rajbir Singh case. No specific findings, reasoning, or operative directions are provided for this petition independently. Any pending miscellaneous applications have been disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Raj Kumar Gaba, has filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula, and others. The present order is a short order, referencing a detailed judgment passed on the same date in a connected case, CWP No. 18800 of 2023, titled Rajbir Singh Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula and others. All pending miscellaneous applications in the present petition have also been disposed of.

What were the issues?

The judgment does not explicitly state the issues that the High Court had to decide, nor does it record the arguments made by the petitioner or the revenue. The order is a procedural one, directing that the decision in this case will follow the detailed judgment in a connected writ petition. Therefore, the specific questions of law or fact, and the contentions of the parties, are not discernible from this short order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-18809-2023 Date of decision: 23.09.2026 Raj Kumar Gaba ..... Petitioner Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula and others ..... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH Present : Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate (through VC) and Ms. Shweta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sourabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel

(through VC) with

Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate and

Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate for the respondent(s)-Income Tax Department. * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J.

(Oral)

1.

For order see the detailed judgment of even date passed in CWP No.18800 of 2023 - Rajbir Singh Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula and others. 2. All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE 23.09.2026 (SUNISH BINDLISH) Jyoti 1 JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No JYOTI SHARMA 2026.09.23 14:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →