ANIL KUMAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/2636/2026HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01016344202610 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, decided that the detailed reasoning for the present case (CWP-2636-2026) would be found in a companion writ petition, CWP No. 15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others, which was also decided on the same date. Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi for Anil Kumar's case are not elaborated upon in this order. The operative directions for CWP-2636-2026 are thus implicitly contained within the judgment of Jyoti Sareen. Any pending miscellaneous applications related to this petition were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anil Kumar, filed a writ petition (CWP-2636-2026) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1) Faridabad and others. The judgment 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, decided on the same date. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.

What were the issues?

The High Court was to decide the issues presented in CWP-2636-2026. However, the judgment explicitly states that the order for this case is contained in the detailed judgment of CWP No. 15791 of 2024. Therefore, the specific issues and arguments for CWP-2636-2026 are not detailed in this particular order. The judgment does not record any arguments made by either the petitioner or the respondents in relation to CWP-2636-2026, as it defers to the reasoning in the companion case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-2636-2026 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 ANIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS ..... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present : Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate and Ms. Kritika 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 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 13:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →