PARVEEN KUMAR JAIN vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR

PDF · subscribers
CWP/27580/2024HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01136018202415 October 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action, including the challenge to Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court granted the liberty as prayed for by the petitioner. The reasoning provided is that the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition and was granted permission to file a fresh one. No specific findings were made on the merits of the case or the validity of Section 147A, as the petition was disposed of on the petitioner's request for withdrawal. The operative direction was to permit the withdrawal with liberty.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Parveen Kumar Jain, filed a writ petition (WP-27580-2024) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging an order or action by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar, and others. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order/action are not detailed. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one, also challenging Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents are the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar, and others, representing the Income Tax Department.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action, including challenging Section 147A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contention: 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. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue regarding the withdrawal or the liberty sought by the petitioner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

245 245 245 245

IN T IN T IN T IN T PARVEEN KU PARVEEN KU PARVEEN KU PARVEEN KU CHIEF COMM CHIEF COMM CHIEF COMM CHIEF COMM OTHERS OTHERS OTHERS OTHERS

CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HO HO

HO HO

Present: M

M M fo *

DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB DEEPAK SIB 1.

Le with liberty to also to challeng 2.

24 24 24 24.08 .08 .08 .08.2026 .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

UMAR JAIN UMAR JAIN UMAR JAIN UMAR JAIN

VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS MISSIONER OF INCOME TA MISSIONER OF INCOME TA MISSIONER OF INCOME TA MISSIONER OF INCOME TA

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 Mr. Mangesh Goel, Advocate, for Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Coun Ms. Nikita Garg, Jr. Standing Cou 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-27580 27580 27580 27580-2024 2024 2024 2024 ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : 24 24 24 24.08. .08. .08. .08.2026 2026 2026 2026

...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER AX, AMRITSAR AX, AMRITSAR AX, AMRITSAR AX, AMRITSAR AND AND AND AND ...RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENTS PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH the petitioner. nsel with unsel, Department. 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)

JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE es/No es/No

n s VANDANA YADAV 2026.08.26 12:50 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 →