Case Law › High Court › Wp(C)/33553/2021 Of Debashis Mohanty v....

Wp(C)/33553/2021 Of Debashis Mohanty v. Principal Commnr. Of Income Tax 1, Bbsr

High Court 07 Feb 2022 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · cisnc

Parties

Date of order

07 Feb 2022

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Allowed

Case summary

In Wp(C)/33553/2021 Of Debashis Mohanty v. Principal Commnr. Of Income Tax 1, Bbsr, the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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.

The order — as passed by the High Court

Order No. 02. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P. (C) No. 33553 of 2021 …. Petitioners Mr. S. Ray, Advocate -versus- …. Opp. Parties Debashis Mohanty Opp. Parties Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bhubaneswar and others Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Sr. SC (Income Tax) CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK ORDER07.02.2022 I.A. No.1450 of 2022 1. This is an application for condonation of delay. 2. For the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed and delay in filing the writ petition is condoned. W.P. (C) No. 33553 of 2021 1. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 30[th] October, 2021, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bhubaneswar has passed a reasoned order 24[th] January, 2022 in which inter alia it is held in para-7 as under: “I have carefully considered the whole matter; it is the apprehension of the TRO that the change of title of ownership of the property in favour of the Petitioner and others is a deliberate design of the certificate debtor to avoid payment of legitimate dues of revenue. However, further enquiry on the matter considering all related facts of the case is necessary to come to such a conclusion. Moreover, he should have obtained approval of designated authority before proceeding to issue prohibitory orders. Since the action of the TRO in issuing prohibitory orders is premature and need further investigation & lawful procedure before such action could be legally resorted to, the RTO is directed to left the prohibitory order placed on the bank & pass necessary order in this behalf.” 2. In that view of the matter and the letters as at Annexures-9 and 9-A of the writ petition stand quashed. Copies of the order will be sent forthwith by the Registry to the concerned Branch Managers of SBI and Axis Bank Ltd. for necessary action. 3. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. 4. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. (Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

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.