Punjab and Haryana High Court
CWP/28900/2026 of INDIAN TRACTOR COMPANY Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS on 10 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA INDIAN TRACTOR COMPANYINDIAN TRACTOR COMPANYINDIAN TRACTOR COMPANYINDIAN TRACTOR COMPANY UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSUNION OF INDIA AND
IN T
IN T
IN T
IN T
INDIAN TRA
INDIAN TRA
INDIAN TRA
INDIAN TRA
UNION OF IN
UNION OF IN
UNION OF IN
UNION OF IN
CORAM:
CORAM:
CORAM:
CORAM: HO
HO
HO
HO
Present :
M
M
M
M
M
for
**
DEEPAK SIB
DEEPAK SIB
DEEPAK SIB
DEEPAK SIB
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.
1. Le also be entitled this Court date Union of India
2. In terms of Jyoti notice dated 3 Income Tax Ac
10.09 10.09 10.09 10.09.2026 .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 AT AT AT CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH
CW CW CW CW Da Da Da Da
ACTOR COMPANY ACTOR COMPANY ACTOR COMPANY ACTOR COMPANY
VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS NDIA AND OTHERS NDIA AND OTHERS NDIA AND OTHERS NDIA AND OTHERS
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. Prince Goyal, Advocate, for th Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standing
r. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing C
s. Kavita, Advocate and
s. Arushi Bansal, Advocate r the respondents. *** BAL AL BAL AL, J. , J. , J. , J.(O (O (O (Oral ral ral ral) earned counsel for the parties a d to the same relief as has been ed 10.09.2026 passed in CWP- a and others. n the light of the above consen i Sareen’s case (supra), resulting 31.03.2022 issued to the petitio ct, 1961 alongwith consequential
Whether speaking/reasoned. : Ye Whether Reportable. : Ye AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA AB AND HARYANA H WP WP WP WP-28900 28900 28900 28900-2026
ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : ate of Decision : 10.09.
10.09.
10.09. 10.09.2026
...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER ...PETITIONER
...RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENTS PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL PAK SIBAL ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH ISH BINDLISH he petitioner. g Counsel with Counsel agree that the petitioner would n granted through a judgment of -15791-2024 – Jyoti Sareen vs. nsus, the petition is allowed in g in quashing of the impugned oner under Section 148 of the l proceedings, if any. (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
d f . n d e VANDANA YADAV 2026.09.13 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document