Case LawHigh Court › Wp(C)/16001/2025 Of S.menaka Reddy v. Th...

Wp(C)/16001/2025 Of S.menaka Reddy v. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 17 Jun 2025 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Wp(C)/16001/2025 Of S.menaka Reddy v. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
17 Jun 2025
Assessment year(s)
2014-15
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Wp(C)/16001/2025 Of S.menaka Reddy v. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2025) decided the matter.

Decision: In view of the aforesaid situation, this writ petition stands disposed of with the liberty sought for by the Petitioner, if there be any, in accordance with law.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

Order No. 01. Signature Not Verified Digitally SignedSigned by: MANORANJANSAMALDesignation: PERSONALASSISTANTReason: AuthenticationLocation: Orissa High Court,CuttackDate: 18-Jun-2025 10:28:07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16001 of 2025 S. Menaka Reddy ….Petitioner Mr. Sarbeswar Sahoo, Advocate -versus- ….The Principal Chief Commissioner Opposite Parties of Income Tax, Range-I and others Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel CORAM: THE HON’BLETHE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN ORDER 17.06.2025 This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. The Petitioner has questioned the veracity of issue of letter by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Berhampur-Opposite Party No.3 requesting payment of outstanding dues for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 3. At the stage of taking up the matter today, learned counsel for the Petitioner sought for leave to approach the appropriate authority to ventilate the grievance of the Petitioner. 4. Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties has no objection to the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner. appearing for the Opposite Parties has no objection to the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner. 5. In view of the aforesaid situation, this writ petition stands disposed of with the liberty sought for by the Petitioner, if there be any, in accordance with law. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 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