Shivali Thakur v. Income Tax Officer & Others
High Court
17 Sep 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
Shivali Thakur v. Income Tax Officer & Others
Date of order
17 Sep 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Shivali Thakur v. Income Tax Officer & Others, the High Court (2025) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether approved for reporting?[1] For the Petitioner.
Decision: The petition is disposed of in above terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,SHIMLA
CWP No. 13214 of 2024
Date of decision: 17.9. 2025
Shivali Thakur.
...Petitioner.
Versus
Income Tax Officer & Others.
…Respondents.
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?[1]
For the Petitioner. Mr.Sahil Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents:Mr.Neeraj Sharma and Mr.Ishan Kashyap,Advocates.
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)
The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following
substantive relief:-
(a) Issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing thenotices issued under Section 148 and all the consequentialproceedings dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-2 issued by RespondentNo. 1 for the subject year being devoid of jurisdiction.
1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes
2
2.The subject matter of the challenge in this petition, wherebythe legality, validity and propriety of impugned notice under Section 148,dated 20.3.2024 is already under consideration before the Hon’bleSupreme Court of India in SLP (c) No. 17040/2024, titled as TheAssistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another Vs. M/s Dr. ReddyLaboratories Ltd. with connected matters.
3. Since the issue involved in this petition is already pendingconsideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore, keeping inview the judicial discipline, we refrain ourselves from giving our opinionwith respect to impugned notice under Section 148, dated 20.3.2024(Annexure P-2), as assailed in this petition. We direct that the presentpetition shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Hon’bleSupreme Court and the decision thereto, shall be binding on this casealso.
4. The continuity of proceedings before the competentauthority, in view of the pendency of the matter before the Hon’bleSupreme Court is bound to lead to multiplicity of litigation. Therefore, wedeem it appropriate to stay such proceedings till the time issue is finallydecided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ordered accordingly.
3
CWP No. 13214 of 2024
5.
The petition is disposed of in above terms, so also the
pending application(s), if any.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.
17[th] September, 2025(Keshav)
(Sushil Kukreja), Judge.
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.