Prem Chand Katna Vs the Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

Prem Chand Katna Vs the Income Tax Officer and Others — Income Tax | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of in the above terms: the Court declined to opine on the impugned Section 148 notice, directed that the petition be governed by and bound by the Apex Court's judgment in SLP (C) No.17040/2024, and stayed the proceedings before the competent authority till the Apex Court finally decides the issue; pending application(s), if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned notice under Section 148 dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2), based on the sanction/approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is illegal, without jurisdiction and against procedure, and whether it and all consequent proceedings/actions should be quashed.

Court's answer

Since the issue involved in the petition is already pending consideration before the Apex Court, the Court, keeping in view judicial discipline, refrains from giving its opinion on the impugned notice under Section 148 dated 29.03.2025 as assailed in the petition.

Ratio / Principle

The present petition shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the pending matter, and the decision of the Apex Court shall be binding on this case.

Key takeaways

Continuity of proceedings before the competent authority while the matter is pending before the Apex Court would lead to multiplicity of litigation; therefore such proceedings are stayed till the time the issue is finally decided by the Apex Court.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Income Tax – Notice under Section 148 dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) with sanction/approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenged by way of CWP seeking certiorari – Identical issue already pending before the Apex Court in SLP (C) No.17040/2024, The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. v. M/s Dr. Reddy Laboratories Ltd., with connected matters – High Court, in view of judicial discipline, refrains from expressing any opinion on the impugned notice – Directs that the present petition shall be governed by the Apex Court's judgment, which shall be binding on this case – Continuity of proceedings before the competent authority during pendency before the Apex Court would lead to multiplicity of litigation; such proceedings stayed till the issue is finally decided by the Apex Court – Petition disposed of in above terms, along with pending application(s), if any. (Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur and Sushil Kukreja, JJ.; oral judgment authored by Vivek Singh Thakur, J.)

( 2025:HHC:29907 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 14236 of 2025 Decided on: 03.09.2025 ______________________________________________________________ Prem Chand Katna ....Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer & Ors. …Respondents _ Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the petitioner :	Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aditya Sood, Advocate.
For the respondents :	Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr. Ishaan kashyap, Advocates.

Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (oral)

Notice. Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate, waives

service and accepts notice on behalf of the 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 29.03.2025 (Annexure P2), being illegal, without jurisdiction, against the procedure and further based

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

( 2025:HHC:29907 )

on the illegal sanction/approval under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and all proceedings/actions consequent thereto.”

The subject matter of challenge in this petition,

whereby the legality, validity and propriety of impugned notice under Section 148, dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P2) is already under consideration before the Apex Court 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 Apex Court, therefore, keeping in view the judicial discipline, we refrain ourselves from giving our opinion with respect to impugned notice under Section 148, dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P 2), as assailed in this petition. We direct that the present petition shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Apex 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

( 2025:HHC:29907 )

before the Apex 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 Apex Court. Ordered accordingly.

The petition is disposed of in above terms, so

also pending application(s), if any.

( Vivek Singh Thakur ) Judge

( Sushil Kukreja ) September 03, 2025 Judge

(raman)