Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IDT) 842425 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Others
Pronouncement Date
26-02-2026
Assessment Year
misc
Judgement Text
"CWP-34840-2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 223 -2 CWP-34840-2024 Date of Decision : 26.02.2026 MOHIT JOSHI …. PETITIONER V/S UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS …. RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI Present : Ms. Kajal Garg, Advocate for Mr.Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl.A.G, Haryana. **** LISA GILL, J. (Oral) 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘HGST Act’) claiming said provisions to be arbitrary, unreasonable and beyond the legislative competence and ultravires the Constitution of India. Petitioner seeks quashing of proceedings undertaken against him in terms of said provisions. 2. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the challenge to the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of HGST Act, 2017 is unsustainable in view Printed from counselvise.com ANJU GOEL 2026.03.05 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP-34840-2024 -2- of judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Radhika Agarwal vs. Union of India and others, 2025 (2) TMI 1162-Supreme Court (LB). 3. Learned counsel for petitioner fairly states that this aspect is indeed covered by judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Radhika Agarwal (supra), however she prays for liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as may be available to him in accordance with law in respect to the other prayers as addressed in this writ petition. 4. Keeping in view facts and circumstances as above, the challenge to vires of Section 69 and 132 of HGST Act is negated and prayer in this respect is rejected. Liberty is afforded to the petitioner to avail remedies as may be available to him in accordance with law in respect to other prayer(s) as addressed. 5. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (LISA GILL) JUDGE (RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI) JUDGE 26.02.2026 anju Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Printed from counselvise.com ANJU GOEL 2026.03.05 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh "
AI summary
The case involves Mohit Joshi, the petitioner, who challenged the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, claiming these provisions were arbitrary, unreasonable, and beyond the legislative competence, thus ultravires the Constitution of India. The respondents, represented by the Additional Advocate General of Haryana, argued that the challenge was unsustainable based on a Supreme Court judgment. The petitioner acknowledged the applicability of the Supreme Court's decision but sought the court's permission to pursue other remedies related to different prayers in the writ petition.
