Case LawHigh Court › The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Inco...

The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar v. Mr. J. Pattanaik, Advocate

High Court 06 Mar 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar v. Mr. J. Pattanaik, Advocate
Date of order
06 Mar 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar v. Mr. J. Pattanaik, Advocate, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P (C) No.35889 of 2023 Radhakrishna Seba Education and Charitable Trust, Bhubaneswar The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar ….. Vs. ….. Petitioner Mr. J. Pattanaik, Advocate Opposite PartiesMr. S. Mohanty, Sr. S.C., Income Tax Deptt. Order No.01 CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER06.03.2024 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. J. Pattanaik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order of assessment dated 16.03.2021 under Annexure-2 and further to issue direction to opposite party no.2 to consider and dispose of the appeal preferred against the order dated 16.03.2021 within a stipulated period. 4. Mr. J. Pattanaik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner has filed appeal against the order of assessment dated 16.03.2021 under Annexure- 2, the same is still pending for consideration and in the meantime, three years have passed. 5. Mr. S. Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department contended that he has not received any instructions with regard to status position of the appeal. However, if the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending, let direction be issued to the appellant authority to consider and dispose of the same. 6. Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner in accordance with law. Alok (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Digitally SignedSigned by: ALOK RANJAN SETHYDesignation: A.R-cum-Sr. SecretaryReason: AuthenticationLocation: ORISSA HIGH COURTDate: 07-Mar-2024 12:01:46
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