The Court allowed the petitioner's writ petition following the precedent set in Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India. The impugned notice dated 3.03.2023 was quashed along with consequential proceedings.
Quashing of the notice dated 3.03.2023 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and consequential proceedings.
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.
143
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-15891-2025 Date of Decision : 11.09.2026
GULSHAN ARORA
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH
Present : M r. Rohit Kaura, Advocate, for th e petitioner. M r. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing C ounsel with Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing Counsel, fo r the respondents-Income Tax Department. * ***** **
DEEPAK SIBAL, J.(Oral)
(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE
11.09.2026 (SUNISH BINDLISH) Vandana yadav JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned. : Y e s/No Whether Reportable. : Y e s/No
VANDANA YADAV 2026.09.13 12:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is allowability in terms of the precedent Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
CWP-15791-2024 – Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and othersFollowed¶1
1 provisions across 1 enactments
GULSHAN ARORA
INCOME TAX OFFICER
DEEPAK SIBAL
SUNISH BINDLISH
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
