Case Law › High Court › Suraj Jindal v. Director Of Income Tax (...

Suraj Jindal v. Director Of Income Tax (Investigation),Chandigarhand Others

High Court 27 Jan 2020 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · phhc

Parties

Date of order

27 Jan 2020

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

Case summary

In Suraj Jindal v. Director Of Income Tax (Investigation),Chandigarhand Others, the High Court (2020) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: 2701.2020|Raman JAJAY TEWARI]JUDGE | IAVNEESH JHINGAN]JUDGE | Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Yes/NoYes/No.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH CWP-10246-1993 (O&M)Date of Decision: 27.01.2020 SURAJ JINDAL Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION),CHANDIGARHAND OTHERS.....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARIHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN FE AS Present:Mr.K.L.Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Ameet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Dinesh Goyal, Standing counsel for the respondents. AJAY TEWARI, J.(ORAL) After arguing for sometime, learned senior counsel for the petitioners prays for permission to withdraw the present writ petition. Allowed as prayed for, Dismissed as withdrawn. Since the main case has been decided, the pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. 2701.2020|Raman JAJAY TEWARI]JUDGE | IAVNEESH JHINGAN]JUDGE | Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Yes/NoYes/No.

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA

This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.

Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.