RAJEEV CHADHA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/18881/2023HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01103210202323 September 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the specific issues of this case independently. Instead, it directed that the order for CWP-18881-2023 be passed in accordance with the detailed judgment issued on the same date in CWP No. 18800 of 2023 (Rajbir Singh Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula and others). Consequently, the findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi of the present case are subsumed within the aforementioned detailed judgment. The operative directions for this petition would therefore be those stipulated in the judgment for CWP No. 18800 of 2023. No issue was expressly left undecided; rather, the decision was deferred to a related, more detailed judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rajeev Chadha, filed a writ petition (CWP-18881-2023) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula, and others. The judgment was passed on 23.09.2026. The High Court, in its order, referred to a detailed judgment of even date 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, were also disposed of.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the issues raised in the writ petition filed by Rajeev Chadha. However, the judgment does not specify the exact questions of law or fact that were before the court. It only states that the order for the present petition is being passed in terms of the detailed judgment of even date in a connected matter (CWP No. 18800 of 2023). Therefore, the specific contentions of the assessee (petitioner) and the revenue (respondent) are not recorded in this short order. The judgment does not name any specific provisions of the Income Tax Act or any authorities, circulars, or precedents relied upon for the decision in this particular case, as it defers to another judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-18881-2023 Date of decision: 23.09.2026 Rajeev Chadha ..... 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 →