THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA

PDF · subscribers
RP/218/2024HC KarnatakaKAHC01025509202425 October 2024Author: K.SOMASHEKAR,RAJESH RAI K3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka, in its order on the Review Petition, noted that the petitioners (revenue authorities) had filed an SLP before the Supreme Court of India against the order dated January 22, 2024. The Supreme Court had dismissed this SLP on August 20, 2024. In light of the Supreme Court's dismissal, the High Court found no reason to proceed further with the Review Petition. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the Review Petition. The operative direction was the dismissal of the Review Petition, rendering the appeal infructuous due to the Supreme Court's decision. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns a Review Petition (RP No. 218 of 2024) filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and other revenue authorities, seeking a review of an order dated January 22, 2024, passed by the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Appeal No. 831 of 2022. The respondent is Sunil Kumar Sharma. The revenue authorities presented their case before the High Court. Subsequently, the revenue authorities filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court of India against the High Court's order. The SLP was dismissed by the Supreme Court on August 20, 2024.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court in the Review Petition was whether there were sufficient grounds to review its previous order dated January 22, 2024, passed in Writ Appeal No. 831 of 2022. The petitioners, the revenue authorities, argued that the dismissal of their SLP by the Supreme Court rendered further proceedings in the Review Petition infructuous. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondent, Sunil Kumar Sharma, regarding the review itself, nor does it detail the original grounds for the Writ Appeal or the subsequent SLP.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 114

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

REVIEW PETITION NO. 218 OF 2024 IN WRIT APPEAL NO.831 OF 2022 BETWEEN:

1.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL)-11, BENGALURU OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11 ROOM NO 322, 3RD FLOOR CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), C.R.BUILDING

3.

THE JOINT / ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE-1 C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD BENGALURU - 560001.

4.

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), C.R.BUILDING QUEEN’S ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001.

5.

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION-1), C.R.BUILDING …PETITIONERS

Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka

(BY SRI. Y V RAVIRAJ- ADVOCATE)

AND:

SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA S/O SRI D P SHARMA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO. 328, TIPPU SULTHAN PALACE ROAD KALASIPALYAM, BENGALURU - 560 002. …RESPONDENT

THIS REVIEW PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 22.01.2024 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WA NO.831/2022.

THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR)

This Review Petition has been filed by the petitioners / Commission of Income Tax and others, seeking review of the order dated 22.01.2024 passed by this Court in W.A.No.831/2022 vide Annexure-“A”.

2.

Whereas learned counsel Shri Y.V. Raviraj for petitioners is present before Court and submits that against the said judgment dated 22.01.2024, an appeal was preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in SLP (Civil) Diary No.21526/2024 and that the aforesaid SLP has been dismissed of by the Hon’ble Apex Court by order dated 20.08.2024. Copy of the same has been furnished by the learned counsel for the petitioners, for the purpose of reference. 3. In view of the dismissal of the SLP filed before the Hon’ble Apex Court, there is no consequence to proceed further in this matter. Therefore, this Review Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, I.A.No.1/2024 also stands disposed of.

Sd/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE

Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE KS

More judgments on Section 114

All 54 judgments and leading authorities on Section 114 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →