High Court allowed the writ petition by unanimous consent of counsel, relying on a previous judgment in Jyoti Sareen to quash a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Quashing of notice dated 14.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 along with 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.
309
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-17207-2024 Date of Decision : 10.09.2026
NAVIN KHOSLA
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH
Present : D r . Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate w ith M r. Gurdeep Singh, Advocate an d M r. Iman Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner. M s. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standin g Counsel with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Jr. Standing C ounsel Ms. Kavita, Advocate and Ms. Arushi Bansal, Advocate fo r the respondents. * ***** **
DEEPAK SIBAL, J.(Oral)
(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE
10.09.2026 (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 petitioner is entitled to the same relief granted in CWP-15791-2024 regarding quashing of reassessment notice.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and othersRelied on¶1
CWP-15791-2024 – Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and others
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Navin Khosla
Union of India
Deepek Sibal
Sunish Bindlish
Vandana Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
