From the definition we know that a stochastic process $(X_t)_{t\in\mathbb{Z}}$ is called strictly stationary if for all $h\in \mathbb{N}$ the distribution of $(X_t,X_{t+1},\ldots,X_{t+h})$ is independent of $t$.
Now consider that $X_t$ is a MA(1) process so we can actually write $X_t = Z_t + \theta Z_{t-1}$ for some other doubly infinite sequence $Z_t$ in other words $t\in\mathbb{Z}$.
It should be fairly clear that if $Z_t$ is strictly stationary then also is $X_t$ but I want to make it explicit. So if we write out: $$ (X_t,\ldots,X_{t+h}) = (Z_t + \theta Z_{t-1},\ldots, Z_{t+h} + \theta Z_{t+h-1}). $$ My question is: How is this in distribution independent of $t$? I know that independence of $t-1$ should imply independence of $t$ as we have $Z_t + \theta Z_{t-1} \sim Z_{t+1} + \theta Z_{t}$ for all $t\in\mathbb{Z}$. But how can we see that? Should the vector the splitted into $(Z_t,\ldots,Z_{t+h}) + \theta(Z_{t-1},\ldots,Z_{t+h-1})$? Any help is greatly appreciated.
That is, all of the finite-dimensional distributions are translation invariant. This is the sense in which it is said the process is "independent" of $\tau$.
Weak-sense stationarity, on the other hand, requires merely that the $1$st moments and autocovariances of the processes constituent random variables are translation invariant:
This is also a sense in which the properties of the process are said to be "independent" of $\tau$. One can see how both these invariances would be the case for the process you defined if, for instance, one assumes the $Z_t$ to be continuous i.i.d. random variables, with mean $0$ and finite variance $\sigma^2$. For then, we have the following:
That is, the process is strictly stationary. Weak sense stationarity follows, as we can explicitly see in the following:
Notice that the r.h.s. of each set of equations above are "independent" of $\tau$.