THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. DR. N. THIPPANNA SHETTY

PDF · subscribers
RP/1565/2011HC KarnatakaKAHC02022501201124 August 2012Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the review petition was not maintainable. This was based on a Circular which was held to be applicable to pending appeals, rendering the original appeal itself not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed a review petition seeking to review a judgment passed in an appeal. The appeal involved a net tax effect of approximately Rs. 4,00,000/-.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the review petition in light of a subsequent circular that affected the maintainability of the original appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Order XLVII Rule 1, Section 151 of CPC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2012 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. KEMPANNA R.P. No. 1565/2011 in I.T.A. No. 1118/2006 BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Gulbarga. 2. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (inv), Circle-1(1), Hubli. - Petitioners (by Sri Y.V. Raviraj, Advocate) AND: Dr. N. Thippanna Shetty, Hosalli, Kudligi Ta., Bellary. - Respondent (by Sri A. Shankar, Advocate) This review petition is filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 R/w Sec. 151 of CPC praying to review the judgment passed by this Court in I.T.A. No. 1118/2006 dated 31.03.2011, etc.

- 2 - This petition coming on for hearing on interlocutory application this day, N.Kumar J., made the following: ORDER 1. This review petition is filed seeking review of the order passed in I.T.A. No. 1118/2006 on 31.03.2011. The net tax affected in the appeal was about Rs.4,00,000/- and odd. In view of the Circular No. 3/2011 which is held to be applicable to pending appeals by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. Ranka & Ranka reported in (2012) 72 DTR (Kar) 270, the appeal itself is not maintainable. Therefore this review petition filed to review the order even on merits is not maintainable. 2. At any rate, this review petition is filed subsequent to the said Circular. Therefore seen

- 3 - from any angle the review petition is not maintainable. Accordingly it is dismissed. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE Bvv

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →