The High Court dismissed a writ petition rendered infructuous as the stay application had already been disposed of by the Income Tax Department.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(THROUGH VC)
107
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-21136-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.07.2024
RATTAN SI N GH
. . . . Petitione r
Vs.
CHIEF COM M ISSIONER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND ANR
. . . . Respondent s
****
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: M r. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advo c ate f or the petitioner.
M r. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing C o unsel f or the respondents/Revenue.
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral)
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE
July 22, 2024
Mohit goyal
1. Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? Yes/No
MOHIT GOYAL 2024.07.23 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RATTAN S IH
CHIEF COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
ANR
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
SANJAY VASHISTH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
