T. Radhakrishnan v. Shri Sai Raj Deputy Director- Income Tax, Income Tax Department, Centralised Processing Center, Electronic City, Bengaluru

2025:CGHC:3830 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 1236 of 2024 1 - T. Radhakrishnan S/o Late C. Thankappan Aged About 67 Years (Retd. I.A.S.), R/o Flat No. 28, 6th Main Road, K.H.M. Block, Opposite R.T. Nagar Post Office, Ganganagar, Bengaluru- 560032 ... Applicant versus 1 - Shri Sai Raj Deputy Director- Income Tax, Income Tax Department, Centralised Processing Center, Electronic City, Bengaluru- 560500 ... Respondent (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Applicant:Mr. Pushp Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent:Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 22/01/2025 1.This Contempt petition has been preferred by applicant under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance of the order dated 12.4.2024 (Annexure-C/1) passed in WP(T) No.70/2024.215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance of the order dated 12.4.2024 (Annexure-C/1) passed in WP(T) No.70/2024. 2.Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the order under contempt dated 12.4.2024 (Annexure-C/1) passed by this Court in WP(T) No.70/2024 has been complied with and communication to this effect has been made by respondent/contemnor to the applicant. He contempt dated 12.4.2024 (Annexure-C/1) passed by this Court in WP(T) No.70/2024 has been complied with and communication to this effect has been made by respondent/contemnor to the applicant. He Digitallysigned byRUKHSARRUKHSARBANOBANODate:2025.01.2215:49:19+0530 would further submit that applicant is fully satisfied with the said communication. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the respondent also conceded the aforesaid fact. aforesaid fact. 4.Having considered the contentions of learned counsel for both the parties, since the order under contempt has been complied with, therefore, no case of contempt is made out against the respondent.parties, since the order under contempt has been complied with, therefore, no case of contempt is made out against the respondent. 5.Accordingly, the rule issued to respondent is discharged and contempt proceeding is dropped.proceeding is dropped. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar