IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.11407 of 2024 Date of decision: 30.04.2025 M/s India Steel Continental (P) Ltd. ….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ….Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: Mr. Goverdhan Lal Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms.Sharmila Patial, Mr. Sushant Kaprate, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 & 4/State. Mr. Virbahadur Verma, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No.2. Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Senior Advocate with Ms. Godawari, Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Mr. Hitansh Raj and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocates, for respondent No.3. Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge(Oral): The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner for grant of the following substantive reliefs:- “(i) Issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing or Notice in DRC-01 dated 29.05.2024 (Annexure P-2) and impugned order dated 22.08..2024 in Form DRC-07 (Annexure P-3) issued by respondent No.4 being illegal and barred by limitation; 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2 (ii) Issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of Notification No.09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 (Annexure P-1) and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023 (Annexure P-7) issued by respondent No.3; (iii) To say the proceedings for FY 2019-20 by staying the operation of DRC-01 dated 29.05.2024 (Annexure P-2) and impugned order dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure P-3) issued under Section 73 of the Act from taking any coercive action during the pendency of the Civil Writ Petition.” 2. The subject matter of the challenge in this petition, whereby the legality, validity and propriety of Notification Nos.9 and 56 of 2023, dated 31.03.2023 & 28.12.2023, respectively, are already under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP © No.4240 of 2025, titled as M/s HCC-Sew-MEIL-AAG-JV vs. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors., wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 21.02.2025, passed the following order:- “The subject matter of challenge before the High Court was to the legality, validity and propriety of the Notification No.13/2022 dated 05.07.2022 & Notification Nos.9 and 56 of 2023, dated 31.03.2023 & 28.122023, respectively. 2. However, in the present petition, we are concerned with Notification Nos.9 & 56 of 2023, dated 31.03.2023 & 28.12.2023, respectively. 3. These Notifications have been issued in the purported exercise of power under Section 168(A) of the 3 Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, the “GST Act”). 4. We have heard Dr. S. Muralidhar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner. 5. The issue that falls for the consideration of this Court is whether the time limit for adjudication of show cause notice and passing order under Section 73 of the GST Act and SGST Act (Telangana GST Act) for financial year 2019-2020 could have been extended by issuing the Notifications in question under Section 168-A of the GST Act. 6. There are many other issues also arising for consideration in this matter. 7. Dr.Muralidhar pointed out that there is a cleavage of opinion amongs different High Courts of the country. 8. Issue notice on he SLP are also on the prayer for interim relief, returnable on 7.3.2025.” 3. Since the issues involved in this petition are 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 either the vires of Section 168-A or aforesaid notifications 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. 4. As the matter is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the interim order passed in this case, would continue to operate and would be governed by the final adjudication of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue in the aforesaid Special Leave Petition. 4 The petition is disposed of in above terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. ( Tarlok Singh Chauhan ) Judge ( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge April 30, 2025 (reena)