SHAMAL YADAV THROUGH LEGAL HEIR RAJESH DEVI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
CWP/598/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01003628202515 September 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action. Furthermore, the petitioner was granted liberty to challenge Section 147A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the fresh petition. The court also disposed of all pending miscellaneous applications. The judgment does not delve into the merits of any substantive tax dispute or the validity of Section 147A, as the petition was dismissed on procedural grounds of withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shamal Yadav (through Legal Heir Rajesh Devi), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad, and another entity from the Income Tax Department. The specific assessment year(s) and the order or action under challenge are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner's counsel sought to withdraw the petition. The court was asked to consider this withdrawal request.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the petitioner should be allowed to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner's counsel sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and to challenge Section 147A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The revenue's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. No specific questions of law or mixed law and fact were framed by the court, nor were any specific provisions of the Income-tax Act, other than Section 147A, explicitly discussed as the subject of dispute in the context of the withdrawal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(Sr. No.109 )

CWP-598-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision : 15.09.2026

SHAMAL YADAV THROUGH LEGAL HEIR RAJESH DEVI .....Petitioner

Versus

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD AND ANR ` .....Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH

Present : Mr. Inder Paul Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Varun Issar, Senior Standing Counsel and

Ms. Nikita Garg, Junior Standing Counsel for

the respondent(s)-Income Tax Department.

* * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) (1) Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh one on the same cause of action as also to challenge therein Section 147A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (2)

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. (3)

All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(DEEPAK SIBAL)

JUDGE

15.09.2026

( SUNISH BINDLISH ) sunil yadav

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No

Whether reportable : Yes / No SUNIL YADAV 2026.09.17 11:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 147A

All 31 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →