Case LawHigh Court › Mr. Rudra Prasad Kar, Advocate v. Princi...

Mr. Rudra Prasad Kar, Advocate v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of …. Opposite Parties Income Tax, Odisha, Bhubaneswar & Another

High Court 30 Nov 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Mr. Rudra Prasad Kar, Advocate v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of …. Opposite Parties Income Tax, Odisha, Bhubaneswar & Another
Date of order
30 Nov 2022
Assessment year(s)
2017-18
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mr. Rudra Prasad Kar, Advocate v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of …. Opposite Parties Income Tax, Odisha, Bhubaneswar & Another, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.30933 of 2022 …. Petitioner Gangadhar Jena Mr. Rudra Prasad Kar, Advocate -versus- Principal Chief Commissioner of …. Opposite Parties Income Tax, Odisha, Bhubaneswar & another Mr. R.S. Chimanka, Sr. Standing Counsel for O.P. No.1 Mr. Abinash Kedia, Jr. Standing Counsel for O.P. No.2 CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE M. S. RAMAN ORDER30.11.2022 Order No. 1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated 29[th]September, 2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-2), Bhubaneswar under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) imposing penalty of Rs.79,18,648/- on the petitioner for the assessment year 2017-18. 01. 2. The grievance of the petitioner was, then Mr. R.P. Kar, learned counsel, is that despite the pendency of an appeal against the original assessment order and stay having been continued by the same officer on 27[th] October, 2022 subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of the demanded tax in six installments, he has nevertheless proceeded to pass the penalty order and the apprehension is that the said impugned order will be in force. MRS/AKS 3. The Court notes that the impugned order is an appealable one. Consequently, the following directions are issued; (i) If an appeal is filed by the Petitioner against the impugned order not later than 2[nd] January, 2023 accompanied by an application for condonation of delay, explaining the delay on account of pendency of the present writ petition, the same will be considered in accordance with law by the Appellate Authority. (ii) Till such time, the Appellate Authority passes an order on application for stay to be filed along with the said appeal within the same time by the Petitioner, the impugned order dated 29[th] September, 2022 shall be kept in abeyance. 4. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. (Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (M. S. Raman) Judge
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan