M/S ANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — CWP/14199/2024

Case under Income Tax Act Section 226-227. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 31-May-2024

CNR: PHHC010772252024

e-Filing Number

30-05-2024

Filing Number

CWP/32133/2024

Filing Date

30-May-2024

Registration No

CWP/14199/2024

Registration Date

30-May-2024

Judge

Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal , Ms. Justice Lapita Banerji

Coram

Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal , Ms. Justice Lapita Banerji

Bench Type

Double

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Income Tax Act Section 226-227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S ANE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED

    Adv. SHIVAM SHARMA

  2. 2.M/s Ane Industries Private Limited

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.M/s Ane Industries Private Limited

  3. 3.The Secretary Personnel

  4. 4.Excise And Taxation Commissioner

  5. 5.Income Tax Officer Tds

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal,ms. Justice Lapita BanerjiView PDF

    Summary of CWP/14199/2024 The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax to expeditiously decide ANE Industries' fresh application regarding compounding of offences for Assessment Year 2016-17. The court accepted the petitioner's prayer with no objection from respondents, reserving the petitioner's right to challenge any prejudicial order subsequently passed by the tax authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/14199/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CWP/14199/2024 The Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax to expeditiously decide ANE Industries' fresh application regarding compounding of offences for Assessment Year 2016-17. The court accepted the petitioner's prayer with no objection from respondents, reserving the petitioner's right to challenge any prejudicial order subsequently passed by the tax authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case