What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Review Petition because the Revenue could not furnish the necessary documents to prove their case fell under the exception. Liberty was again granted to the Revenue to seek revival of the order upon obtaining the required documents.

The Revenue filed a Review Petition seeking to recall a previous order and restore an appeal. They contended that their case fell under an exception in a circular, allowing for the appeal to be heard. However, they failed to provide supporting documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue could establish that their case fell under an exception to a circular, thereby justifying the revival of a dismissed appeal, and the sufficiency of evidence provided.

Sri. Sunil Kumar Sharma vs The State of Karnataka | Karnataka High Court 2020

- 1 -

NC: 2024:KHC:6814-DB RP No. 151 of 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REVIEW PETITION NO. 151 OF 2020 IN I T A NO. 100 OF 2018 BETWEEN:

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - (4), BMTC COMPLEX, KORMANGALA, BANGALORE. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4 (2) (3), BENGALURU. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SANMATHI E I, ADVOCATE) AND:

SMT PARVATHAMMA, NO.25, MUNNEKOLALU, MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560037, PAN: ASLPP 1928R. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI LIKITH R P, ADVOCATE)

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO: 1. REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/08/2019 IN ITA NO. 100/2018 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE PETITIONER- APPELLANT TO BE HEARD INDEPENDENTLY AFRESH. 2. TO PASS SUITABLE ORDERS THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO BE GRANTED IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2024:KHC:6814-DB RP No. 151 of 2020

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS THIS DAY R DEVDAS J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDERS

This Review Petition was filed at the hands of the revenue having regard to the liberty reserved by this Court in its order dated 30.08.2019 permitting the appellants to seek revival of the appeal, if it is found that the matter falls within the exception carved out in Clause 10 of Circular Bearing No.3/2018.

It is the contention of the revenue which has filed the Review Petition that since this case falls under the exception carved out in Clause 10, the order passed by this Court had to be recalled while restoring the appeal.

However, inspite of sufficient time being granted to the Review petitioners to furnish the information relating to the revenue audit objection to sustain the contention of the revenue that this case falls under the exception, the Review petitioners are unable to furnish the documents to support its contention.

- 3 -

NC: 2024:KHC:6814-DB RP No. 151 of 2020

In that view of the matter, the Review Petition stands dismissed.

However, at the request of the learned counsel for the revenue, once again liberty is reserved to the revenue to seek revival of this order after necessary documents are obtained by the revenue, which would show that this case falls under the exception in Clause 10 of the Circular Bearing No.3 of 2018.

Sd/- JUDGE

BRN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

SRI. SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments