Dismissed¶¶24

Vikas Garg v. Union of India and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Apr 2025CWP/9375/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Vikas Garg v. Union of India and another; CWP-9375-2025 (O&M); High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh; decided 03.04.2025; Article 226 Constitution of India; show cause notice dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-1); order-in-original dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure P-2); penalty imposed on non-existing Director; order held appealable; withdrawal with liberty to file appeal in physical mode; dismissed as withdrawn; Sudeepti Sharma, J. (author); Arun Palli, J.; advocates Shivani Sethi, Vishav Bharti Gupta, Saurabh Goel (Senior Standing Counsel).

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the order-in-original dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure P-2) in physical mode before the appropriate forum. ¶¶24

Vikas Garg Vs Union of India and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

¶1

CWP-9375-2025 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

121

¶5

CWP-9375-2025 Date of Decision: 03.04.2025

Vikas Garg

......Petitioner

Vs.

Union of India and another

¶10

......Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶12

Present: Ms. Shivani Sethi, Advocate, for Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Saurabh Goel, Senior Standing Counsel, for the respondents.

¶14

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶15

The present writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the show cause notice dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-1) and order-in-original dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure P-2).

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the show cause notice dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-1) as well as order-in-original dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure P-2) are bad in the eyes of law since the penalty has been imposed on the non-existing Director i.e. the petitioner, therefore, are liable to be set aside.

¶17

On receipt of advance copy of the petition, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the order-in-original dated 17.12.2024

¶18

(Annexure P-2) is appealable.

¶19

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.04.04 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-9375-2025 (O&M)

¶21

-2-

¶22

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate forum. She further requests that she be allowed to file an appeal by physical mode.

¶23

The request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶24

In view of the above, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the order-inoriginal dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure P-2) in physical mode before the appropriate forum.

¶25

(ARUN PALLI) (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE

¶26

03.04.2025 Virrendra

¶27

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes / No Whether reportable: Yes / No

¶28

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.04.04 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Vikas Garg v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Garg v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhpal Singh HUF Vs Income Tax Officer and Others

Balihar Singh Vs Union of India and Others

Bhupinder Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Najin Export Private Limited Vs State of Haryana and Others

Nalesh Gupta Vs Union of India and Anr.

Deepak Suri Vs Income Tax Officer