SAI VINAYAKKA EDUCATION SOCIETY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court decided to dispose of the present writ petition in terms of the detailed judgment passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi for the present case are not elaborated upon in this order. The operative directions would be those contained in the judgment of Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the decision is deferred to the aforementioned judgment.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Sai Vinayakka Education Society, filed a writ petition (CWP-21528-2026) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and another. The judgment was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The High Court, in its order, stated that the present writ petition is to be decided in terms of the detailed judgment passed in a connected case, CWP No.15791 of 2024, titled Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were also disposed of.
What were the issues?
The High Court was to decide the issues arising from the writ petition filed by Sai Vinayakka Education Society. However, the judgment explicitly states that the order is to be passed in terms of the detailed judgment in Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Therefore, the specific issues before the High Court in the present case are not detailed, but they are implicitly the same as those decided in the connected writ petition. The judgment does not record arguments from either the petitioner or the respondents for the present writ petition, as it is being decided based on a prior judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21528-2026 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 SAI VINAYAKKA EDUCATION SOCIETY ..... Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR ..... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present : Mr. Deepak Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel, Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel and Ms. Nikita Garg, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondents. * * * 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) Jyoti 1
JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No JYOTI SHARMA 2026.09.15 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
