The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a writ petition challenging a Section 148 notice by applying co-ordinate bench decisions, granting liberty to proceed if advised.
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.
CWP-478-2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
140
CWP-478-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-13.01.2025
Gunjan Bansal
....Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present: Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate & Mr. Rohit Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Sr. Standing counsel with Ms. Muskan Gupta, Advocate for the respondent-Union of India.
SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.
Gaurav Arora 2025.01.21 14:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-478-2025
2
(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE
(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE
13.01.2025
Gaurav Arora
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
Gaurav Arora 2025.01.21 14:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was valid in view of the CBDT circular regarding NFAC's exclusive jurisdiction.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and othersApplied¶7
Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others
Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and othersApplied¶7
Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gunjan Bansal
Union of India
ARUN PALLI
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
