Munish Kumar v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 10504 of 2024 Date of decision: 05.09.2025 Munish Kumar …Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner:Mr. Manik Sethi, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr. IshaanKashyap, Advocates. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr. Ishaan Kashyap,Advocates, appear, waive and accept service of notice on behalfof the respondent. 2.The instant petition has been filed for grant of thefollowing substantive relief:- “(i) Issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or anyother appropriate writ, order or direction for quashingnotice dated 22.08.2024 issued by the respondent underSection 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (Annexure P-1) along with the order dated 31.08.2024 issued by therespondent under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act1961 (Annexure P-3) and also, the notice dated31.08.2024 issued respondent under Section 148 of theAct for A.Y. 2018-19 (Annexure P-4), being without jurisdiction having regard to Section 151-A, introduced inthe Income Tax Act, 1961 w.e.f. 01.11.2020 and also theCBDT notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022(Annexure P-5) and also arbitrary for the reasonsmentioned in the grounds of the petition.” 3. The subject matter of the challenge in this petition,whereby the legality, validity and propriety of impugned noticeunder Section 148, dated 31.08.2024 (Annexure P-4) is alreadyunder consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (C) No. 17040/2024, titled as The AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax & Another Vs. M/s Dr.Reddy Laboratories Ltd. with connected matters. 4. Since the issue involved in this petition is alreadypending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court,therefore, keeping in view the judicial discipline, we refrainourselves from giving our opinion with respect to impugnednotice under Section 148, dated 31.08.2024 (Annexure P-4), asassailed in this petition. We direct that the present petition shallbe governed by the judgment passed by the Hon’ble SupremeCourt and the decision thereto, shall be binding on this casealso. 5. The continuity of proceedings before the competentauthority, in view of the pendency of the matter before theHon’ble Supreme Court is bound to lead to multiplicity oflitigation. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to stay such proceedings till the time issue is finally decided by the Hon’bleSupreme Court. Ordered accordingly. 6.The petition is disposed of in above terms, so alsothe pending application(s), if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge 5[th] September 2025 (sanjeev) (Sushil Kukreja) Judge