RENU JAIN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/8024/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01045737202513 July 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court has not provided a specific decision or reasoning for this particular writ petition (CWP-11941-2025) within this excerpt. Instead, it has directed that the order for this case will be identical to the detailed judgment passed in CWP No. 15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. Consequently, the findings, reasoning, ratio decidendi, and operative directions for Mukesh Goel's petition are contingent upon the outcome of the Jyoti Sareen case. No specific issues were decided on merits in this excerpt, and no operative directions were issued independently.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mukesh Goel, has filed a writ petition (CWP-11941-2025) before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1, Faridabad, and others. The judgment indicates that the order being challenged is not detailed in this specific excerpt. The case was reserved on 08.09.2026 and decided on 10.09.2026. The High Court has directed that the order for this petition will be the same as 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 have also been disposed of.

What were the issues?

The specific questions of law or fact that the Tribunal had to decide are not detailed in this excerpt. The judgment states that the order for this petition is being passed in terms of the detailed judgment in CWP No. 15791 of 2024. Therefore, the issues and arguments presented in that connected case would be relevant. Without the details of CWP No. 15791 of 2024, the specific issues and contentions of the assessee (Mukesh Goel) and the revenue (Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax) cannot be ascertained from this document. The judgment does not record any arguments for either side in this specific CWP.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-11941-2025 (O&M) Reserved on :08.09.2026 Date of decision: 10.09.2026 MUKESH GOEL ..... 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 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 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →