Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/13763/2025 of MUNISH KUMAR Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(5) CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Munish Kumar Income Tax Officer, Ward 5 (5 CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. for the petitioner. Mr.Vaibhav Gupta, for the Income Tax Department DEEPAK SIBAL Challenge made through the instant petition is to
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CWP-13763-2
IN THE Munish Kuma Income Tax O
CORAM : H
H
Present : M
fo
M
fo
DEEPAK SIB
C dated 20.03.20 under Section challenge rais issued by the done because i issued by the notice could ha
2. In petitioner plac i. CWP India ii. CWP other 2025 (O&M) Sr. No.134
E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH
CWP-1376 Date of De
r
Versus fficer, Ward 5 (5) Chandigarh an
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA Mr. Kartik Bansal, Advocate, or the petitioner. Mr.Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate, or the Income Tax Department-re *** BAL, J. (Oral)
Challenge made through the ins 024 (Annexure P-1) issued to the 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1 ed by the petitioner is that th Jurisdictional Assessing Office in terms of the notification dated Ministry of Finance, Governm ave been issued only by way of f n support of his afore submiss es reliance on the following two P-15745-2024, titled Jatinder S a and others, decided on 19.07.2 P-21509-2023, titled Jasjit Sin rs, decided on 29.07.2024.
B AND HARYANA AT H 63-2025 (O&M) ecision : 14.05.2025
…Petitioner
nd others
…Respondents AK SIBAL A BANERJI espondents. stant petition is to the notice e petitioner by the respondents 1961. The primary ground of e impugned notice has been er which could have not been d 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2), ment of India, the impugned faceless assessment. sion, learned counsel for the o judgments of this Court:- Singh Bhangu Vs. Union of 2024; and gh Vs. Union of India and VANDANA 2025.05.15 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-13763-2
3. L that the case o through the af Benches of thi
4. In Jatinder Sing dated 20.03.20 Officer, is here the petitioner i
5. T
May 14, 2025 vandana
Whether speak Whether repor 2025 (O&M) earned counsel for the responde of the petitioner is covered in his foresaid two judgments rendered is Court in Jatinder Singh Bhan n the light of the above, in ter gh Bhangu and Jasjit Singh ( 024 (Annexure P-1), issued by eby quashed with liberty to the r in accordance with law. he petition is allowed in the abov
(DEEPA
J (LAPIT
J
king/reasoned :
Yes/No rtable :
Yes/No ents does not dispute the fact s favour by the law laid down d by two different co-ordinate ngu and Jasjit Singh (supra). rms of the law laid down in (supra), the impugned notice y the Jurisdictional Assessing respondents to proceed against ve terms. AK SIBAL) JUDGE
TA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2025.05.15 17:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document