THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. SUDIP BHATTACHARJEE VALUATION OFFICER (INCOME TAX), OFFICE OF THE VALUATION CELL, INCOME
Case at a glance
- Bench
- MANISH CHOUDHURY
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont. Cas(C)/42/2024 SMT. SHEWALI BRAHMA W/O SHRI NIREN RABHA, R/O VILL-HOWRAGHAT TINIALI, MOUZA- LANGPHER, P.O.-KACHUPUKHURI, P.S.-HOWRAGHAT, DIST-KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM, PIN-782482 VERSUS SUDIP BHATTACHARJEE VALUATION OFFICER (INCOME TAX), OFFICE OF THE VALUATION CELL, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, 7TH FLOOR, CHRISTIAN BASTI, G.S. ROAD, GUWAHATI, DIST- KAMRUP (METROPOLITAN), ASSAM, PIN-781005 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A J SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
22.01.2024 Heard Mr. G. Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has preferred the instant petition, styled as a contempt petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sections 11 and Page No.# 2/2 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 and the provisions of the Gauhati High Court Rules alleging non-compliance of the directions made in an order dated
16.10.2023 passed by this Court in a writ petition, WP(C) 5709/2023. It is noticed that in the said writ petition, WP(C) 5709/2023, the petitioner was impleaded as party respondent no. 10. It is also relevant to quote the following observations made in the order dated 16.10.2023 (supra); “If the land owners continue to feel aggrieved in the matter event thereafter, it would be open for them to approach this Court again, by filing appropriate writ petition.” Thus, it is evident from the order dated 16.10.2023 that if the petitioner as the land owner continues to feel aggrieved in the matter, then liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach this Court by filing appropriate writ petition. However, instead of preferring a writ petition in compliance of the direction made in the order dated 16.10.2023 (supra), the petitioner has preferred a petition, styled as a contempt petition. In the above view of the matter, the instant contempt petition is not entertained and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Liberty, however, stands reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate writ petition, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.