CYBERHUB DEVELOPERS LLP vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/34236/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01177857202410 September 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present writ petition (CWP-34236-2024) is to be decided in accordance with the detailed judgment passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others, on the same date. Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi applicable to CWP-34236-2024 are not elaborated upon in this order but are instead deferred to the aforementioned connected judgment. The operative directions and relief granted would therefore be as per the decision in CWP No.15791 of 2024. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the decision was contingent on another judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Cyberhub Developers LLP, filed a writ petition (CWP-34236-2024) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon, and others. 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 - 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 CWP-34236-2024. However, the judgment explicitly states that the decision in this case is to follow the detailed judgment of an even date passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024. Therefore, the specific issues and arguments presented by the petitioner (Cyberhub Developers LLP) and the revenue (Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon) in CWP-34236-2024 are not detailed in this specific order. The operative part of this order refers to another judgment for the substantive decision. No arguments for either side are recorded in this specific order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-34236-2024 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 CYBERHUB DEVELOPERS LLP ..... Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GURGAON 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. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Vidul Kapoor, 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 12:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →