PARVEEN KUMAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/5012/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01028796202521 February 2025Author: MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI,MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the same relief as granted in the case of Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others (CWP No.15791 of 2024), decided on 10.09.2026. Based on this consensus, the Court allowed the petition. The impugned notice dated 26.03.2024 issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with consequential proceedings, if any, were quashed. The reasoning is based on the agreement between the parties to follow the precedent set in the Jyoti Sareen case. The ratio decidendi is that if parties agree to a specific relief based on a prior judgment of the same court, that relief should be granted. No issue was expressly left undecided. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Parveen Kumar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The order or action under challenge is a notice dated 26.03.2024 issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and any consequential proceedings. The authority that passed the notice is the Income Tax Officer. The amount in dispute is not stated. The procedural history involves the petitioner filing a writ petition and the parties agreeing that the petitioner is entitled to the same relief as granted in a previous judgment of the same court dated 10.09.2026 in CWP No.15791 of 2024 (Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 26.03.2024 issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and consequential proceedings are liable to be quashed? (Question of law/mixed law and fact, turning on Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner relies on the consensus reached with the respondents that the petitioner is entitled to the same relief as granted in the case of Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others (CWP No.15791 of 2024), decided on 10.09.2026. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel and Junior Standing Counsel, agreed with the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the same relief as granted in the aforementioned Jyoti Sareen case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(Sr. No.112 )

CWP-5012-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision : 15.09.2026

PARVEEN KUMAR .....Petitioner

Versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS ` .....Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH

Present : Mr. Yash Gilhotra, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Senior Standing Counsel,

Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Junior Standing Counsel for

the respondent(s)-Income Tax Department.

* * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) (1) Learned counsel for the parties agree that the petitioner would also be entitled to the same relief as has been granted through a judgment of this Court dated 10.09.2026 passed in CWP No.15791 of 2024 - Jyoti Sareen Vs. Union of India and others. (2)

In the light of the above consensus, the petition is allowed in terms of Jyoti Sareen’s case (supra), resulting in quashing of the impugned notice dated 26.03.2024 issued to the petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with consequential proceedings, if any. (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 11:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →