Authority: High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla

Order Date: 22 July 2025

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Sudha (represented by Mr. M.R. Sharma and Mr. Aditya Sharma, Advocates).
  • Respondents: Union of India (represented by Mr. Janak Raj, Central Government Counsel) and three other respondents, including the National Faceless Assessment Centre.
  • The petition sought multiple writs: (i) to compel respondents to transmit the entire case records; (ii) to quash a notice dated 29‑03‑2025 issued under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act by respondent No. 2 and a notice dated 29‑03‑2025 issued under Section 148 by respondent No. 3; (iii) to declare the reassessment proceedings under Section 148 and the sanction under Section 151 as illegal, contrary to natural justice and without jurisdiction; (iv) to stay the operation of the impugned notices until final decision; and (v) to restrain the National Faceless Assessment Centre and respondent No. 4 from further action under Sections 144B, 143(3), 147 and 148.
  • The Court observed that the legality of the notice under Section 148 dated 29‑03‑2025 is already under consideration before the Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) Diary No. 17041/2024, titled Union of India & Ors. vs. Association of Technical Textiles Manufacturers and Processors & Anr.

Court Reasoning

  • Since the same issue is pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court refrained from expressing any opinion on the impugned notices, invoking judicial discipline.
  • The Court held that continuation of proceedings before the tax authority while the Supreme Court case is pending would lead to multiplicity of litigation.
  • Accordingly, the Court deemed it appropriate to stay all further proceedings related to the petitioner’s case until the Supreme Court delivers its judgment.

Final Outcome

  • The petition is disposed of in the terms stated above.
  • All pending applications, if any, are also dismissed.
  • A stay is ordered on any further action by the respondents, specifically the National Faceless Assessment Centre and respondent No. 4, under Sections 144B, 143(3), 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, pending the Supreme Court’s decision.
  • The case shall be governed by the forthcoming Supreme Court judgment, which will be binding on the parties.

Topics: Tax Litigation, Court Order