What did the High Court hold?

The High Court reviewed its previous order. It delinked ITA No. 100070/2016 from the earlier order and directed it to be listed separately for hearing on merits. The order concerning ITA No. 100207/2015 remained undisturbed.

The Revenue filed a review petition seeking to review a previous judgment. The Revenue contended that ITA No. 100070/2016 was erroneously clubbed and disposed of along with ITA No. 100207/2015. The respondent agreed that there was an error in tagging.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal was erroneously clubbed and disposed of with another appeal, requiring review and separate listing for adjudication on merits.

PCIT vs M/S Jay Minerals | Karnataka High Court 2021

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10476-DB RP No. 100028 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL REVIEW PETITION NO.100028 OF 2018 BETWEEN: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580025.

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI-590001. - PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M. THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)

AND: M/S. SRI PRABHULINGESHWAR SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTD., SIDDAPUR, JAMAKHANDI, BAGALKOT DISTRICT-587301. PAN: AACCS7864B. - RESPONDENT (BY SRI. CHAITANYA V. MUDRABETTU, ADVOCATE)

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN ITA NO.100070/2016 DATED 20.11.2017 AND RESTORE THE SAME TO BE HEARD AND DISPOSED ON MERITS & ETC.

THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL

Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10476-DB RP No. 100028 of 2018

ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV)

The present review petition has been filed by the Revenue seeking for review of the judgment in I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 dated 20.11.2017 and restore the appeal to be heard and disposed of on merits.

The submission made by the Sri Thirumalesh, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue is that I.T.A. No. 100207/2015 came to be allowed by order dated 20.11.2017. It is however submitted that by oversight I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 was tagged and disposed of by the order dated 20.11.2017 along with I.T.A. No. 100207/2015.

It is further submitted that I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 relates to a different matter and ought not to have been clubbed. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that there is an error by tagging I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 with I.T.A. No. 100207/2015.

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10476-DB RP No. 100028 of 2018

In the light of joint submission of counsel on both sides and noticing the submission that I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 relates to a different matter, the order dated 20.11.2017 is reviewed insofar as I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 is delinked and directed to be listed separately. Accordingly, order dated 20.11.2017 is reviewed and I.T.A. No. 100070/2016 is directed to be restored and listed separately.

Needless to state it is reiterated that the order insofar as I.T.A. No. 100207/2015 stands undisturbed. Accordingly, review petition is disposed off.

Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE BVV, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 38

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAY MINERALS

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments