Gm Powertech Vs the Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

Gm Powertech Vs the Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Stay of all proceedings consequent to the impugned Section 148 notice dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) until the Hon'ble Supreme Court finally decides the pending issue, with the petition to be governed by and bound by the Supreme Court's judgment; petition and pending application(s), if any, disposed of accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice under Section 148 dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-3), based on sanction/approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, together with proceedings consequent thereon, is illegal, without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

Court's answer

Since the identical issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Court, keeping in view judicial discipline, refrained from giving any opinion on the validity of the impugned Section 148 notice; the present petition shall be governed by the Supreme Court's judgment, and its decision shall be binding on this case.

Ratio / Principle

Continuity of proceedings before the competent authority while the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court would lead to multiplicity of litigation; therefore such proceedings are stayed till the issue is finally decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax — Notice under Section 148 dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) founded on sanction/approval under Section 151, Income Tax Act, 1961 — Writ petition (CWP No.14080 of 2025) for certiorari to quash notice and consequent proceedings — Identical issue already pending before Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 17040/2024, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another v. M/s Dr. Reddy Laboratories Ltd., with connected matters — Applying judicial discipline, the High Court (Vivek Singh Thakur and Sushil Kukreja, JJ.) declined to express any opinion on the validity of the notice and directed that the petition be governed by, and bound by, the Supreme Court's judgment — Proceedings before the competent authority stayed till final decision by the Supreme Court to avoid multiplicity of litigation — Petition and pending applications disposed of accordingly (Paras 3–6).

( 2024:HHC:9014 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.14080 of 2025 Date of decision: 01.09.2025

GM Powertech, Kalaamb Nahan, District Sirmour. ….Petitioner Versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward Palampur, H.P & Ors.

….Respondents

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, J. Whether approved for reporting ?¹

For the Petitioner: Mr.Aditya Sood, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr. Ishan Kashyap, Advocates.

Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge(Oral):

Issue notice. Mr.Neeraj Sharma, Advocate waives service and accepts notice on behalf of respondents.

The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:-

“(a) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby quashing/setting aside the impugned notice issued under Section 148 dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) being illegal, without jurisdiction, against the procedure and further based on the illegal sanction/approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all proceedings/actions consequent thereto.”

1

Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement ?

2 ( 2024:HHC:9014 )

The subject matter of the challenge in this petition, whereby the legality, validity and propriety of impugned notice under Section 148, dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) is already under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (c) No. 17040/2024, titled as The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Another Vs. M/s Dr. Reddy Laboratories Ltd. with connected matters.

Since the issue involved in this petition is already pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, therefore, keeping in view the judicial discipline, we refrain ourselves from giving our opinion with respect to impugned notice under Section 148, dated 17.06.2025 (Annexure P-3), as assailed in this petition. We direct that the present petition shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the decision thereto, shall be binding on this case also.

The continuity of proceedings before the competent authority, in view of the pendency of the matter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court is bound to lead to multiplicity of litigation. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to stay such proceedings till the time issue is finally decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ordered accordingly.

3

( 2024:HHC:9014 )

The petition is disposed of in above terms, so also the

pending application(s), if any.

( Vivek Singh Thakur ) Judge

( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge

September,01, 2025 (reena)