VIJAY KUMAR ARORA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1 AND OTHERS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, in its order dated 10.09.2026, decided that the present writ petition (CWP-4488-2025) would be governed by the detailed judgment passed on the same date in CWP No.15791 of 2024, Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Consequently, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi applicable to CWP-4488-2025 are not elaborated upon in this excerpt, as they are contingent on the decision in the referenced connected case. The operative directions for CWP-4488-2025 would therefore be those determined in the Jyoti Sareen judgment. Any pending miscellaneous applications related to this petition were also disposed of.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Arora, filed a writ petition (CWP-4488-2025) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1, Faridabad, and others. The judgment was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The High Court indicated that the order for this case would be the same as that passed in a connected writ petition, CWP No.15791 of 2024, titled 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 arising in CWP-4488-2025. However, the judgment explicitly states that the order for this case is to be the same as that passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024. Therefore, the specific issues and arguments presented by the petitioner and the revenue in CWP-4488-2025 are not detailed in this excerpt. The judgment does not record any arguments made by either side for this specific petition, only referencing the connected case for the operative order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-4488-2025 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 VIJAY KUMAR ARORA ..... Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 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 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
