FIBRES & FABRICS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/183/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC01022431201323 September 2013Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Review Petition was not maintainable. The reasoning was based on the fact that the Revenue had not challenged the impugned order before the Apex Court and that the Circular No. 5 of 2008 did not support challenging adverse judgments on the ground of their recurring nature. The Court dismissed the review petition. However, it clarified that this dismissal would not prevent the Revenue from reviving the appeal if the judgment in the case of Ranka and Ranka (72 DTR 270) was reversed by the Apex Court. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original appeal (ITA No.1086 of 2008).

What were the facts?

The Revenue, comprising the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, filed a Review Petition before the High Court of Karnataka. This petition sought to review an order dated 25.09.2012 passed by the High Court in ITA No.1086 of 2008. The original appeal was filed by the Revenue against R.K. Rakesh. The Revenue stated that although they had not challenged the impugned order before the Apex Court via a special leave petition, they were filing this review petition based on the reasoning in other similar cases. The Revenue also referred to Circular No. 5 of 2008, noting that it did not list recurring nature as a reason to challenge adverse judgments.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Review Petition filed by the Revenue is maintainable. The Revenue contended that they were filing the review petition for the same reasons as in other cases, and that Circular No. 5 of 2008 did not provide for challenging adverse judgments based on their recurring nature. The Respondent (R.K. Rakesh) did not present any arguments as recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR

REVIEW PETITION No. 183 OF 2013 IN ITA No.1086 OF 2008 BETWEEN :

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.R.BUILDING

QUEENS ROAD

BANGALORE

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE – 1(2)

C.R.BUILDING

QUEENS ROAD

BANGALORE ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.)

AND :

R.K.RAKESH NO.1, 15TH CROSS KILARI ROAD BANGALORE – 560 053

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.A.SHANKAR AND M.LAVA, ADVS.)

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING FOR REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.1086/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA, BANGALORE.

THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, N.KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Though in this matter, the revenue has not challenged the impugned order before the Apex Court by filing special leave petition, relying on the order passed in the other cases, this review petition is filed for the same reasons. In fact in Circular No.5 of 2008 the exception does not have recurring nature as an item to challenge adverse Judgments. This review petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, it is dismissed. The dismissal of this review petition would not come in the way of revenue reviving the appeal in the event of judgment of this Court in the case of Ranka and Ranka, 72 DTR 270, is reversed by the Apex Court.

SD/- JUDGE

SD/- JUDGE HJ

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →