1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 3043 of 2025 Date of decision: 17 .9 . 2025 Pawan Kumar Sood ...Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others. …Respondents. Corum Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner. Mr.M.R. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Senior Panel Counsel for Union of India. Mr.Neeraj Sharma and Mr.Ishan Kashyap, Advocates, for respondent for Income Tax Department. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral) The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:- (a) For the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the notice dated 22.3.2024 (Anneuxre P-4) under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, approved by respondent No.2, notice dated 26.3.2024 (Annexure P-5) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, issued by respondent No.3 notice dated 28.6.2024 (Anneuxre P-6) under Section 144(B) of the Income Tax Act, issued by respondent No.4 notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act dated 9.9.2024 (Anneuxre P-7) issued by 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes 2 respondent No.4, notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act dated 11.10.2024 (Anneuxre P-8) by respondent No.4. 2. The subject matter of the challenge in this petition, whereby the legality, validity and propriety of impugned notice under Section 148, dated 26.3.2024 (Annexure P-5) 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. 3. 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 26.3.2024 (Annexure P-5), 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. 5. 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. 6. The petition is disposed of in above terms, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. (Sushil Kukreja), Judge. 17th September, 2025 (MS)