Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF MARCH, 2016 PRESENT THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA REVIEW PETITION No. 252/2015 IN ITA No. 117/2009
BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income-Tax, C.R. Building, Queens Road, Bangalore.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-7(1), C.R. Building, Queens Road, Bangalore.
... PETITIONERS
(By Sri. K.V. Aravind, Advocate)
AND:
M/s Gina Enterprises, No.45, 11th Cross, 1st Stage, Indiranagar, Bangalore-560038.
... RESPONDENT
(By Sri. B.G. Chidananda Urs., Advocate) …
2 This Review Petition is filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC praying to review the order dated 09/01/2015 passed in Income Tax Appeal No.117/2009.
This Review Petition coming on for Admission this day, N. Kumar J., made the following:
ORDER
This review petition is filed seeking review of the judgment passed by this Court on 9th January, 2015 passed in ITA No.117/2009 holding that instructions bearing No.3/2001 issued by the CBDT is retrospective in operation as declared in the case of Commissioner for Income Tax –vs- Ranka & Ranka reported in 352 ITR PAGE 121). The said Circular applies to the subject matter of the appeal being Rs.10 lakhs. The grievance in the revenue petition is that the subject matter of the appeal is Rs.12.60 lakhs and therefore, there is an error apparent on the face of the record.
If the subject matter of the appeal is Rs.12.60 lakhs, even if the aforesaid Circular is applied, the limit is only to an extent of Rs.10 lakhs. But by a
3 subsequent Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December 2015, the limit has been increased to Rs.20 lakhs which is retrospective. In the sense, it applies to all the pending proceedings.
In that view of the matter, though the impugned judgment on the day it was passed was erroneous, in view of the subsequent Circular, no case for review of the said judgment is made out. Accordingly, review petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
Judge
Sd/-
Judge
Nsu/-