SANDEEP KUMAR HUF vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) FARIDABAD AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/26398/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01141999202510 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 10.09.2026, decided CWP-26398-2025 (O&M) by referring to the detailed judgment passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Consequently, the operative directions for the present case are to be found within that referenced judgment. The High Court also ordered the disposal of all pending miscellaneous applications in this case. No specific findings or reasoning pertaining solely to Sandeep Kumar HUF's case were recorded independently in this judgment; the decision is contingent on the outcome of the Jyoti Sareen case. The specific relief granted or denied, and the underlying legal principles, are therefore not detailed here but are presumed to be elaborated in the referenced judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sandeep Kumar HUF, filed a writ petition (CWP-26398-2025) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Faridabad, and others. The case was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The judgment indicates that the order for this case is detailed in a separate, contemporaneously decided writ petition, 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?

1. What is the operative direction to be issued in CWP-26398-2025 (O&M) filed by Sandeep Kumar HUF against the Income Tax Officer, Faridabad and others? The petitioner was represented by Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate. The revenue was represented by Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel, Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Junior Standing Counsel, and Ms. Nikita Garg, Junior Standing Counsel. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by either the petitioner or the revenue. Instead, it refers to a detailed judgment passed in a connected matter, CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others, for the operative directions.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-26398-2025 (O&M) Reserved on : 08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026

SANDEEP KUMAR HUF

..... Petitioner

Versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD 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 2026.09.16 18:43 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 →