Court grants respondents reply, no coercive action till next hearing, lists case for analogous hearing. Constitutionality challenge on CBDT Notifications.

The Court allowed the respondents to file a reply and ordered no coercive action against the petitioner until the next hearing, listing the case for analogous hearing with another case. The judgment focuses on challenging the Constitutionality of certain provisions in CBDT Notifications, noting similar challenges in other High Courts and interim protection granted. The decision reflects a cautious approach to ensure fairness and procedural justice, aiming for consistency and efficiency in addressing similar legal issues across cases, considering parties' arguments and legal precedents from other jurisdictions.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to the Constitutionality of certain provisions of CBDT Notifications No. 20/2021 and No. 38/2021.

Analysis:
The petition challenges the Constitutionality of specific provisions in CBDT Notifications No. 20/2021 and No. 38/2021. The Court notes that similar challenges have been raised in other High Courts as well, such as the High Court of Delhi, High Court of Bombay, and High Court of Calcutta. In those cases, interim protection was granted to the petitioners. The respondents did not dispute this fact and requested time to file a reply. Therefore, the Court allowed the respondents to file a reply and ordered that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner until the next hearing. The case is listed for analogous hearing along with another case.

This judgment primarily focuses on the issue of challenging the Constitutionality of certain provisions in CBDT Notifications. The Court acknowledges the similar challenges in other High Courts and the interim protection granted in those cases. The decision to allow the respondents to file a reply and to prevent coercive action against the petitioner until the next hearing demonstrates a cautious approach by the Court to ensure fairness and procedural justice. The order for analogous hearing indicates a desire for consistency and efficiency in addressing similar legal issues across different cases. The judgment reflects a balanced consideration of the parties' arguments and the legal precedents established in similar cases in other jurisdictions.

---