SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
RP/699/2022HC KarnatakaKAHC01044215202205 September 2023Author: E.S.INDIRESH6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that there was no error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment dated August 12, 2022. Consequently, the review petitions were disposed of. The court also noted that it was open for both parties to raise their grounds before the Division Bench in the pending Writ Appeals (W.A. Nos. 830-833/2022), and all contentions of the parties were kept open. The operative direction was to dispose of the review petitions without granting the review, while preserving the right to appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sunil Kumar Sharma, filed four Review Petitions (RP Nos. 698, 697, 699, and 700 of 2022) before the High Court of Karnataka. These petitions sought to review the order dated August 12, 2022, passed by the same court in four separate Writ Petitions (W.P. Nos. 9938, 9937, 9939, and 9945 of 2022). The respondents in these review petitions were various income tax authorities, including the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The review petitions were filed under Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

What were the issues?

1. Whether there is an error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated August 12, 2022, passed by this Court in the aforementioned Writ Petitions, warranting a review? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner, through his senior counsel, sought a review of the order, implying that there were errors that needed correction. Specific grounds for review were not detailed in the provided text, but the act of filing a review petition indicates a belief in such errors. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by ASGI, appeared before the court. No specific arguments for the revenue were recorded in the judgment excerpt, other than their appearance and representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 114

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 31 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Heard together (8 matters)

RP No.698/2022
W.P No.9938/2022
RP No. 697/2022
W.P No.9937/2022
RP No. 699/2022
W.P No.9939/2022
RP No. 700/2022
W.P No. 9945/ 2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH IN R.P NO. 698 OF 2022 S/O SRI.D.P.SHARMA …PETITIONER (BY SRI.KIRAN S. JAWALI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SHREEHARI, ADVOCATE) 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(4), BENGALURU 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11 RP NO.698/2022 IN W.P NO.9938/2022 C/W RP NO.697/2022 IN W.P.NO.9937/2022 RP NO.699/2022 IN W.P.NO.9939/2022 RP NO.700/2022 IN W.P.NO.9945/2022 Digitally signed by VARSHA N RASALKAR Location: High Court Of Karnataka

BENGALURU …RESPONDENTS

BY THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.9938/2022 (ANNEXURE-A). IN RP NO. 697 OF 2022 S/O SRI D.P.SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(4), AN AUTHORITY UNDER INCOME TAX ACT 1961 BENGALURU- 560001

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11, BENGALURU INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ROOM NO.322, 3RD FLOOR, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 … RESPONDENTS READ WITH ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 12.08.2022 PASSED BY THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.9937/2022 (ANNEXURE-A). IN RP NO.699 OF 2022 S/O SRI D.P.SHARMA PALACE ROAD KALASIPALYAM 1 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(4), BENGALURU AN AUTHORITY UNDER INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

2 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11 BENGALURU, RESPONDENT (BY SRI.BALBIR SINGH, ASGI FOR BY THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.9939/2022 (ANNEXURE-A). RP NO.700 OF 2022 S/O SRI D.P.SHARMA AND 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11 BENGALURU

2 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(4) AN AUTHORITY UNDER INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 3. THE JOINT/ ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL RANGE-1, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD 4. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD 5. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD ...RESPONDENTS BY THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.9945/2022 (ANNEXURE-A).

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Heard Sri.Kiran S.Jawali, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Shreehari, for the petitioner and Sri.Balbir Singh, learned ASGI appearing on behalf of Sri.Aravind K.V., for the respondents-department. Having taken note of the contentions raised by both sides, I am of the view that there is no error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment. Hence, the petitions are disposed of. However, it is open for both the parties to raise grounds before the Division Bench in W.A.Nos.830- 833/2022 as the same is pending consideration. All the contentions of the parties are kept open.

Sd/- JUDGE NB List No.: 19 Sl No.: 4

More judgments on Section 114

All 54 judgments and leading authorities on Section 114 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →