SUMIT JINDAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/25594/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01138825202510 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 order dated 10.09.2026, did not provide a specific ruling or reasoning on the merits of the case filed by Sumit Jindal (CWP-25594-2025). Instead, the Court directed that the detailed judgment for this case should be referred to the judgment passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi applicable to Sumit Jindal's case are not elaborated upon in this order. The operative direction is to follow the precedent set in the Jyoti Sareen case. No issue was expressly left undecided, but the decision on the merits was deferred to another judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sumit Jindal, filed a writ petition (CWP-25594-2025) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana, and others. The case was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The High Court, in its order, stated that for the detailed judgment, reference should be made to another case, CWP No.15791 of 2024 - 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 Sumit Jindal. However, the judgment does not specify the exact questions of law or fact that the Tribunal had to decide. It only indicates that the decision in this case is based on the detailed judgment passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Therefore, the specific contentions of the assessee (Sumit Jindal) and the revenue are not recorded in this particular order, as the court has deferred to another judgment for the substantive reasoning and decision.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-25594-2025 (O&M) Reserved on : 08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026

SUMIT JINDAL

..... Petitioner

Versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS ..... Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL

Present : Mr. Kartik Bansal, 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 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 2026.09.15 16:06 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 →