Bhanuj Jindal vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax Intelligence
Facts
The petitioner, Bhanuj Jindal, is before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in CRM-M-881-2026. The respondent is the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence. The judgment indicates that the detailed order for this case is the same as that passed in CRM-M-400-2026, titled 'Mohit Singla Vs. Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence', on the same date, February 6, 2026. No specific tax period, amount in dispute, or the precise nature of the order or action under challenge by the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence is detailed in this excerpt. The procedural history is limited to the filing of this petition before the High Court.
Held
The Court, in its oral order, stated that the detailed order for the present case, CRM-M-881-2026, is identical to the order passed in the connected matter, CRM-M-400-2026, titled 'Mohit Singla Vs. Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence', on the same date, February 6, 2026. Therefore, the findings, reasoning, and operative directions in the Mohit Singla case would apply mutatis mutandis to the present petition. The ratio decidendi would be derived from the principles laid down in the order for CRM-M-400-2026. The specific relief granted or the decision on the issues would be contingent upon the content of that order, which is not provided here. No issue was expressly left undecided in this excerpt.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present petition is maintainable in light of the order passed in the connected matter, CRM-M-400-2026 ('Mohit Singla Vs. Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence'). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner, through their senior advocates and advocates, is likely seeking relief based on the grounds and arguments presented in the connected matter, CRM-M-400-2026. Specific arguments are not detailed here but would pertain to the merits of the action taken by the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent, represented by senior Deputy Advocate General Punjab and senior Standing Counsel, along with other advocates, would be defending the action or order passed by the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence. Their arguments would likely address the legality and validity of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 212-2
CRM-M-881-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 06.02.2026
Bhanuj Jindal ...Petitioner(s)
VERSUS Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence
...Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present :- Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Bhavi Kapur, Advocate, Ms. Isha Mehta, Advocate, Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Sr. DAG Punjab.
Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sagar Ratusar, Jr. Standing Counsel, with Mr. Viney Kumar, Advocate; Mr. Abhay Sharma, Advocate; Mr. Parth Sharma, Advocate for the respondent(s).
*****
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)
For detailed order, see the order of even date passed in CRM- M-400-2026 titled as ‘Mohit Singla Vs. Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence’.
(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 06.02.2026
JUDGE Mangal Singh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANGAL SINGH 2026.02.09 14:29 I am the author of this docume
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.