Loading High Court cases…
585 orders · Page 4 of 12
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications are to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court directed the Registry to facilitate this transfer. Additionally, for the Civil Applications seeking amendment of the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events, the Court allowed the same in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court, as per the directions of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh (supra) and the orders of the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to effect this transfer. Regarding the Civil Applications seeking amendments, the Court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C' for the reasons stated therein. The necessary amendments were to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific substantive issues related to income tax assessment were decided in this order.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Additionally, the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses, with directions for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court, in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and prior orders of the Principal Seat. The Registry was directed to effectuate this transfer. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses, with directions for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific tax-related issues were decided on merits.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh (supra) and existing orders from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to facilitate this transfer. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses, with directions for the necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific tax provisions were discussed or decided upon in this procedural order.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat, in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh. The court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Regarding the Civil Applications, the court found the reasons stated therein to be valid and allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', permitting necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues related to the Income Tax Act were decided on merits.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court, in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment and the orders of the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to effect this transfer. Regarding the Civil Applications seeking amendments, the Court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', granting the applicants four weeks from the date of receipt at the Principal Seat to carry out the necessary amendments. No specific tax provisions were discussed as the matter was procedural.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, and subsequent orders passed by the Principal Seat. The Registry was consequently directed to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Furthermore, the Court considered several Civil Applications seeking amendment of the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events. These applications were allowed, permitting the amendments as per the prayer clauses, with a direction for the necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters reaching the Principal Seat. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original Writ Petitions.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat. This decision was based on the compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and prior directions from the Principal Seat. The Court also allowed the Civil Applications seeking amendment to the Writ Petitions, permitting the applicants to carry out the necessary amendments within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The judgment does not record any undecided issues.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, and previous orders of the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to facilitate this transfer. Additionally, the Court considered the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions based on subsequent events. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', granting permission for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, and connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Furthermore, for the Civil Applications seeking amendment due to subsequent events, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues regarding the merits of the income tax assessments were decided.
The High Court directed the Registry to transfer all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications to the Principal Seat. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The court also allowed the Civil Applications seeking amendment to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events, directing that the necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The specific grounds for transfer or the nature of the amendments were not detailed in this excerpt.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court directed the Registry to effect the transfer of all these matters to the Principal Seat. Additionally, the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses, with directions for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 10.04.2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected SLPs. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Additionally, the Civil Applications seeking amendment in the Writ Petitions by virtue of subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', with a direction for necessary amendment to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court of India's judgment dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to facilitate this transfer. Additionally, the Civil Applications seeking amendment to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses. The necessary amendments were to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues regarding the merits of the tax cases were decided.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Additionally, for the Civil Applications seeking amendment due to subsequent events, the Court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The Court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments due to subsequent events. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C'. The Registry was directed to carry out the necessary amendments within four weeks from the date the matters are received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues regarding the merits of the tax disputes were decided, as the focus was procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, and also in line with orders previously passed by the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to effect this transfer. Furthermore, the Court considered the Civil Applications filed by the applicants seeking amendment of their respective Writ Petitions due to subsequent events. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues regarding the merits of the income tax assessments were decided, as the focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions, and subsequent orders passed by the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Furthermore, the Court considered the Civil Applications seeking amendment of the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Civil Applications were allowed in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific issue was left undecided; the court addressed the transfer and the amendments.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court, in compliance with the Supreme Court's directive in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to effect this transfer. Additionally, the Court considered the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', granting permission for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court, in compliance with the Supreme Court's directive in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to effect this transfer. Additionally, the Court considered the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', granting permission for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court also directed the Registry to transfer these matters accordingly. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendment in the Writ Petitions by virtue of subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses. The Court specified that necessary amendments should be carried out within four weeks from the date the matters are received at the Principal Seat. No issue was left undecided, as the court focused on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh (supra) and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to effectuate this transfer. Regarding the Civil Applications seeking amendments, the High Court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses, permitting necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific tax provisions were discussed or decided upon in this procedural order.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The Court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments due to subsequent events. For the reasons stated in these applications, the Court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C'. The Registry was directed to carry out the necessary amendments within four weeks from the date the matters are received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues regarding the merits of the tax disputes were decided, as the focus was procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court directed the Registry to effectuate this transfer. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses, with a direction for necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court also directed the Registry to facilitate this transfer. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', with necessary amendments to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No issues were left undecided.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 10.04.2026 in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected SLPs. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Additionally, the Civil Applications seeking amendment in the Writ Petitions by virtue of subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', with a direction for necessary amendment to be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Furthermore, for the Civil Applications seeking amendment due to subsequent events, the court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that the necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat. This decision was based on the compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh (supra) and the existing orders from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Regarding the Civil Applications seeking amendments, the Court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C' for the reasons stated therein, directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. No specific tax provisions were discussed or decided upon in this procedural order.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and connected Civil Applications are to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision is in compliance with the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on April 10, 2026, in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The Court also noted that certain Writ Petitions, which were not initially on the board, were taken up and are also to be transferred to the Principal Seat. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendment in the Writ Petitions by virtue of subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses 'B' and 'C'. The Registry was directed to carry out the necessary amendments within four weeks from the date the matters are received at the Principal Seat.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court directed the Registry to transfer all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, and subsequent orders from the Principal Seat. The court also allowed the Civil Applications seeking amendment in the Writ Petitions by virtue of subsequent events, directing that the necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The operative direction is solely procedural, concerning the venue of further proceedings.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat. This decision was made in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh (supra) and prior directions from the Principal Seat. The Court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters accordingly. Regarding the Civil Applications seeking amendments, the Court allowed them in terms of the prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', granting four weeks from the date of receipt at the Principal Seat for the necessary amendments to be carried out. No specific issues regarding the merits of the income tax assessments were decided.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications are required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh. The court directed the Registry to transfer all these matters to the Principal Seat. Furthermore, the Civil Applications seeking amendment to the Writ Petitions due to subsequent events were allowed in terms of their prayer clauses. The court specified that the necessary amendments should be carried out within four weeks from the date the matters are received at the Principal Seat. No specific issues regarding the merits of the tax assessments were decided, as the focus was on the procedural transfer of cases.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that all the listed Writ Petitions and Civil Applications were required to be transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. This decision was made in compliance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated April 10, 2026, in the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Tej Pratap Singh, along with connected Special Leave Petitions. The court also addressed the Civil Applications seeking amendments to the Writ Petitions. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, the court allowed them in terms of prayer clauses 'B' and 'C', directing that necessary amendments be carried out within four weeks of the matters being received at the Principal Seat. The court did not decide on the merits of the underlying tax disputes, as the primary focus was on procedural transfer and amendment.
The High Court held that the impugned Assessment Order dated March 24, 2026, could not be sustained as it was passed without granting the petitioner a personal hearing, despite a specific request. This constituted a breach of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court set aside the Assessment Order and the consequential Notice of Demand. The matter was remanded back to the concerned Faceless Assessing Officer for a fresh hearing, commencing from the stage of the Show Cause Notice. The Assessing Officer was directed to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner's authorized representative with at least 5 days' prior notice. The petitioner's representative was expected to appear without seeking adjournments, except in unavoidable circumstances. After hearing the petitioner and considering their submissions, a fresh, speaking assessment order was to be passed within 3 months of the order being brought to the Assessing Officer's notice. The Rule was made absolute, and the Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court has not decided the merits of the case. Instead, it has issued procedural directions based on a Supreme Court judgment. The Court has directed that all writ petitions challenging the validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, be identified and transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court. The petitioners are granted permission to amend their petitions to include challenges to Section 147-A within one week. Matters where amendments are carried out will be transferred to the Principal Seat for final hearing on August 31, 2026. If amendments are necessary but not made before transfer, they can be carried out within one week after the transfer. Petitioners are also given the liberty to file a 'Pursis' if they do not wish for their matters to be transferred to the Principal Seat. No decision has been made on the substantive validity of Section 147-A.
The High Court, in compliance with the Supreme Court's judgment, has directed that all writ petitions challenging the validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, be identified and transferred to the Principal Seat of the High Court. Petitioners are granted permission to amend their petitions to include challenges to Section 147-A within one week. If amendments are not carried out before transfer, they can be done within one week after the transfer to the Principal Seat. Matters not on the board are also to be transferred. Petitioners have the liberty to file a 'Pursis' if they do not wish for their matters to be transferred to the Principal Seat. The court has not decided on the merits of the challenge to Section 147-A itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of handling these cases.
The High Court has not decided the merits of the case. Instead, it has issued procedural directions based on a Supreme Court judgment. The Court has directed that all writ petitions challenging the validity of Section 147-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, be identified and transferred to the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court. The petitioners are granted permission to amend their petitions to include challenges to Section 147-A within one week. Matters where amendments are carried out will be transferred to the Principal Seat for final hearing on August 31, 2026. If amendments are necessary but not made before transfer, they can be carried out within one week after the transfer. Petitioners are also given the liberty to file a 'Pursis' if they do not wish for their matters to be transferred to the Principal Seat. No decision has been made on the substantive validity of Section 147-A.