PUSHPINDER SHARMA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/18832/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01103211202323 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 specific decision or reasoning for this particular writ petition. Instead, it has directed that the order for this case will be the same as the detailed judgment passed in CWP No. 18800 of 2023. Therefore, the findings, reasoning, and operative directions for this case are contingent upon the decision in the aforementioned connected writ petition. Any pending miscellaneous applications have been disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pushpinder Sharma, 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 dated September 23, 2026. The High Court has indicated that the order for this case will be the same as the detailed judgment passed in a connected writ petition, CWP No. 18800 of 2023, titled Rajbir Singh Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula and others. All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, have also been disposed of.

What were the issues?

The judgment does not explicitly state the specific issues that the High Court had to decide in this writ petition. It also does not record the arguments presented by either the petitioner or the respondents. The order merely refers to a detailed judgment passed in a connected writ petition for the decision in this case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-18832-2023 Date of decision: 23.09.2026 Pushpinder Sharma ..... 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 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →