RAJINDRA WINE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/16845/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01089990202529 May 2025Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The court granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action, which would also include a challenge to Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The reasoning for this decision is based on the petitioner's request and the absence of any objection from the respondents. The operative direction is that the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty granted. No issues were expressly left undecided as the petition was disposed of on the request for withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vandana Yadav, filed a writ petition (WP-16845-2025) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging an order or action by the Commissioner of Income Tax and others. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one, also to challenge Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents are the Commissioner of Income Tax and others. The judgment does not specify the assessment year(s) or the amount in dispute. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner can withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one challenging Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the same cause of action? The petitioner, through her counsel Ms. Ruby, sought to withdraw the writ petition. The stated reason was to file a fresh petition that would also challenge Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents, represented by Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Mr. Varun Issar, Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, and Ms. Nikita Garg, did not appear to contest the withdrawal. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents against the withdrawal, nor does it detail the specific grounds for the original petition or the intended challenge to Section 147A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

137 137 137 137

IN T IN T IN T IN T

RAJINDRA W RAJINDRA W RAJINDRA W RAJINDRA W ASSISTANT ASSISTANT ASSISTANT ASSISTANT

CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HO HO

HO HO

Present : M M M M M for

DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB 1.

Le with liberty to also to challeng 2.

03.09 03.09 03.09 03.09.2026 .2026 .2026 .2026 Vandana yadav

THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH

CW CW CW CW Da Da Da Da

WINE WINE WINE WINE

VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOM COMMISSIONER OF INCOM COMMISSIONER OF INCOM COMMISSIONER OF INCOM

ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEP DEEP DEEP DEEP ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNI Ms. Ruby, Advocate for Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate, for th Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Coun s. Pridhi Sandhu, Jr. Standing Co s. Nikita Garg, Jr. Standing Coun r the respondents-Income Tax D *** BAL AL BAL AL, J. , J. , J. , J.(O (O (O (Oral ral ral ral) earned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner to file a fresh one ge therein Section 147A of the In ismissed as withdrawn with liber

Whether speaking/reasoned. : Ye Whether Reportable. : Ye AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA H WP WP WP WP-16845 16845 16845 16845-2025 2025 2025 2025 (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : 03.09. 03.09. 03.09. 03.09.2026 2026 2026 2026

...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ME TAX AND OTHERS ME TAX AND OTHERS ME TAX AND OTHERS ME TAX AND OTHERS

...RES ...RES ...RES ...RESPONDENTS PONDENTS PONDENTS PONDENTS PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH he petitioner.

nsel with ounsel and nsel, epartment. r seeks to withdraw this petition e on the same cause of action as ncome Tax Act, 1961. rty as prayed for. (DEEPAK SIBAL DEEPAK SIBAL DEEPAK SIBAL DEEPAK SIBAL)

JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE (SUNISH BINDLISH) (SUNISH BINDLISH) (SUNISH BINDLISH) (SUNISH BINDLISH)

JUDG JUDG JUDG JUDGE es/No es/No

n s VANDANA YADAV 2026.09.07 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 147A

All 31 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →