A single-paragraph order where the High Court allowed a writ petition involving non-issuance of an income tax notice. The decision relied on a previous judgment and quashed a Section 148 notice.
The notice dated 3.03.2025 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and subsequent proceedings were quashed.
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.
155
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-29538-2026 Date of Decision : 11.09.2026
MS CHAUHAN PAPERS PVT LTD ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNISH BINDLISH
Present : M r. Alok Mittal, Advocate, for th e petitioner. M r. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing Counsel with M s. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate, M s. Tanya Kumar, for the respon d ents. * ***** **
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 a writ petition prisoner demanding quashing of a reissue notice under Section 148 should be allowed by judging the previous judicial judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of IndiaRelied on¶1
CWP-15791-2024 – Jyoti Sareen vs. Union of India and others.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MS CHAUHAN PAPERS PVT LTD
UNION OF INDIA
Deepak Sibal
Sunish Bindlish
Vandana Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
