The High Court dismissed a writ petition for want of prosecution, noting that petitioners failed to appear. The court held that an alternative remedy exists under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
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.
128 I N THE HIGH COURT OF PU N JAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIG A RH
CWP- 1 2733-2026 (O&M) Date o f Decision: 14.07.2026
Inderpal Sing h & Anr. …Petitioners
Vs.
Principal Co m missioner, CGST, Chandigarh a nd others …Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR
Present: N one for the petitioners. ***
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
prosecution.
(ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE
RAJESH KUMAR 2026.07.15 16:30 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners have an alternative statutory remedy available under Section 107 of the CGST Act?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Inderpal Singh
Principal Commissioner, CGST, Chandigarh
others
Aswani Kumar Mishra
Rohit Kapoor
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
