MAIN PAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/23687/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01125040202425 August 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action and to challenge Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the new petition. The reasoning for this decision is not elaborated upon, but it indicates the court's willingness to permit withdrawal under these specific circumstances. No other issues were decided on merits, and no specific findings were made regarding the substantive tax matter.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Main Pal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Yamuna Nagar, and others. The petition challenged certain actions or orders related to income tax proceedings. The specific assessment year(s) and the exact nature of the order or action under challenge, as well as the amount in dispute, are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the writ petition.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner should be allowed to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and to challenge Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The question of law revolves around the court's discretion to grant such a withdrawal with liberty.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-23687-2024 (O&M) 243 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23687-2024 (O&M) Date of decision : 25.08.2026 Main Pal ...Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Yamuna Nagar, Aayakar Bhawan, Jagadhri and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH Present: Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the petitioner (through V.C.). Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel for the respondents. DEEPAK SIBAL, J.(Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh one on the same cause of action as also to challenge therein Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (SUNISH BINDLISH) JUDGE 25.08.2026 Harish Kumar Whether speaking / reasoned: Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No

-1- HARISH KUMAR 2026.08.27 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 147A

All 31 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →