SIMERDEEP KAUR THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SOHAN SINGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6 1 CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
CWP/19556/2026HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01104148202610 September 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, in its judgment dated September 10, 2026, decided to dispose of the writ petition filed by Simerdeep Kaur in terms of the detailed judgment passed on the same date in CWP No. 15791 of 2024 (Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others). Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi pertaining to Simerdeep Kaur's case are not elaborated upon in this excerpt. The judgment indicates that the outcome for Simerdeep Kaur is directly linked to the outcome of the Jyoti Sareen case. All pending miscellaneous applications filed in this matter were also disposed of. No specific issue was left undecided, as the entire petition was decided based on the connected matter.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Simerdeep Kaur, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh, and others. The case was reserved on September 8, 2026, and the decision was made on September 10, 2026. The High Court, in its order, stated that the present writ petition was being disposed of in terms of the detailed judgment passed on the same date in a connected matter, CWP No. 15791 of 2024 titled Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the issues raised in the writ petition filed by Simerdeep Kaur. However, the judgment explicitly states that the order is being passed in terms of a detailed judgment in a connected case (CWP No. 15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others). Therefore, the specific issues before this bench, and the arguments presented by the petitioner and the revenue in this particular case, are not recorded in this excerpt. The operative part of the judgment indicates that the decision in this case is contingent upon the decision in the aforementioned connected writ petition.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-19556-2026 (O&M) Reserved on : 08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026

SIMERDEEP KAUR

..... Petitioner

Versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHANDIGARH & ORS

..... Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

Present : Mr. Rochak Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel,

Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel and

Ms. Kavita, Advocate, for the respondent(s)-revenue.

* * *

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. 1.

For order see the detailed judgment of even date passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. 2.

All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(DEEPAK SIBAL)

JUDGE

10.09.2026

(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) shamsher

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No

Whether reportable : Yes / No SHAMSHER SINGH 2026.09.16 18:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and haryana high court, chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →