Punjab and Haryana High Court

CWP/16507/2024 of RAJIV KUMAR LOHIA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS on 10 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

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 RAJIV KUMAR LOHIARAJIV KUMAR LOHIARAJIV KUMAR LOHIARAJIV KUMAR LOHIA INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORSINCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORSINCOME TAX OFFICER AND

IN T

IN T

IN T

IN T

RAJIV KUMA

RAJIV KUMA

RAJIV KUMA

RAJIV KUMA

INCOME TAX

INCOME TAX

INCOME TAX

INCOME TAX

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM: HO

HO

HO

HO

Present:

M

M

fo

(T

**

DEEPAK SIB

DEEPAK SIB

DEEPAK SIB

DEEPAK SIB

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. Le also be entitled this Court date Union of India

2. In terms of Jyoti notice dated 1 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 CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH

CW CW CW CW Da Da Da Da

AR LOHIA AR LOHIA AR LOHIA AR LOHIA

VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS VERSUS X OFFICER AND ORS X OFFICER AND ORS X OFFICER AND ORS X OFFICER AND ORS

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. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate, for th Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standi r the respondents-Income Tax D Through Video Conferencing) *** 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 19.04.2024 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-16507 16507 16507 16507-2024

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. ing Counsel Department.

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 11:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead