Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA REVIEW PETITION NO.379/2015 IN ITA 485/2009 C/w. RP NO.380/2015 IN ITA NO.480/2009 & RP NO.381/2015 IN ITA NO.759/2008 & RP NO.382/2015 IN ITA NO.481/2009 & RP NO.489/2015 IN ITA NO.482/2009 & RP NO.378/2015 IN ITA NO.479/2009
IN RP NO.379/2015: BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE.
THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INV), CIRCLE-5(1), C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
2 AND:
SMT. T. MANJULA D/O LATE SRI A THIMMAIAH REDDY "NAGENDRA NILAYA, BANASAVADI, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BANGALORE.
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:06/02/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.485/2009, ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
IN RP NO.380/2015: BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE.
THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INV) CIRCLE-5(1), BANGALORE.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. CHANDRAVADANA W/O RAJAGOPALA REDDY, S/O LATE SRI.A.THIMMAIAH REDDY, NO.10, KEMANNA ROAD, MARUTHI SEVA NAGAR,
3 BANGALORE-560 068.
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE & SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:06/02/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO:480/2009, ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
IN RP NO.381/2015: BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF NCOME-TAX(INV) CIRCLE 5(1), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI A. THIMMAIAH REDDY SINCE DECEASED REP. BY HIS LR’S SMT.MUNIYAMMA NO.9, BARETENA AGRAHARA SINGASANDRA POST, HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE & SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)
4 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED: 09/01/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 759/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
IN RP NO.382/2015: BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(INV) CIRCLE-5(1), BANGALORE
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SHRI DASHARATHARAMA REDDY S/O LATE SRI. A. THIMMAIAH REDDY RUKMINI NIVAS,NO.267, 18TH “D” MAIN, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 095
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE & SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:06/02/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 481/2009, ON
5 THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
IN RP NO.489/2015: BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INV), CIRCLE -5(1), BANGALORE
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
LATE SMT. JANAKAMMA REP BY L.R. VENKATESH G.S. NO.101/1, DOMLUR VILLAGE, BANGALORE-560 071
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE & SRI.M.LAVA, ADVOCATE)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:06/02/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 482/2009, ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
6 IN RP NO.378/2015: BETWEEN:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(INV) CIRCLE-5(1), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SHRI T. SATYANARAYANA REDDY S/O LATE SRI. A.THIMMAIAH REDDY NO.16, MADIWALA NEW EXTENSION, BANGALORE-560068
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.A SHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:06/02/2015 PASSED IN ITA NO. 479/2009, ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JAYANT PATEL J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
7 ORDER
All the interim applications are for condonation of delay (except in RP 378/15) as well as the review petitions.
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties for condonation of delay as well as on merits of the review petitions. As such, the delay is for shorter period, therefore, lenient view can be taken for condonation of delay.
However, so far as merits of the case is concerned, proceedings for all purpose were under the provisions of Section 158 BD read with Section 158 BC the Income Tax Act 1961. We do not find that there is any valid ground for review of the earlier order.
Under the circumstances, the review petitions deserve to be dismissed.
8 5. Hence, delay is condoned but the review petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sk/-