M/S NEW DEEP LIQUORS vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/22303/2021HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01102393202121 July 2026Bench: JUSTICE (TO BE NOMINATED),MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petition should be disposed of in terms of the orders passed in the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India and others vs. Ashish Agarwal. The reasoning is based on the precedent set by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court which had disposed of similar writ petitions challenging Section 148 notices by relying on the Ashish Agarwal judgment. The petitioner's request to follow this precedent was not opposed by the Revenue. Therefore, the petition stands disposed of in line with the directions issued in Ashish Agarwal. The operative direction is that the petition is disposed of in terms of the aforementioned Supreme Court judgment. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s New Deep Liquors, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The respondents are the Union of India and others (Revenue). The procedural history involves similar writ petitions being disposed of by a Coordinate Bench, relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India and others vs. Ashish Agarwal. Another writ petition challenging a Section 148 notice on specific grounds was dismissed by the same court on the same day. The petitioner's counsel requested that this petition be disposed of in terms of the order passed in Ashish Agarwal, which was not opposed by the Revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India and others vs. Ashish Agarwal. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the writ petition should be disposed of in terms of the order passed in Ashish Agarwal (supra), as similar matters on the same issue have been decided accordingly by a Coordinate Bench. This prayer was not opposed. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the Revenue regarding this issue, other than not opposing the petitioner's prayer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-22303-2021 (O&M) 1

215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22303-2021 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.07.2026 M/S NEW DEEP LIQUORS ....Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR ***** Present: Mr. Sunil Kumar Mukhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dugga, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing Counsel, Ms. Kavita, Advocate for the respondents/Revenue. ***** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral) 1. Similar writ petitions challenging notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) have been disposed of by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.04.2026 in CWP-4734-2022 titled as ‘Sadashiv Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and others’, relying upon judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India and others vs. Ashish Agarwal, (2023) 1 SCC 617. 2. Another writ petition No.CWP-21666-2021 titled as ‘Pure Milk Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union Of India And Others’, challenging the notice under section 148 of the Act, on the specific grounds, has been dismissed by this Court today, vide separate orders. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in all connected MOHIT GOYAL 2026.07.24 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-22303-2021 (O&M) 2

matters on the same issue, the writ petitions be disposed of in terms of order passed in Ashish Agarwal (supra). This prayer of the petitioner is not opposed. 4. In that view of the matter, this petition stands disposed of in terms of orders passed in Ashish Agarwal (supra). 5. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.

(ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

(ROHIT KAPOOR) 21.07.2026

JUDGE mohit goyal Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No MOHIT GOYAL 2026.07.24 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →