Mca/195/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji Goa v. M/S Velingkar Brothers, Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOAMISC. CIVIL APPLICATIONS NO. 194, 195 AND 196 OF 2012AND STAMP NUMBER (APPLN.) NO.304 OF 2012 MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 194 OF 2012 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXPANAJI, GOA. …... APPLICANT. V/s.DOLPHIN AND COMPANY. ….... RESPONDENT. Ms. A. Dessai, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S. Singbal, Advocate for the respondent. MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 195 OF 2012 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXPANAJI, GOA. …... APPLICANT. V/s.M/S. VELINGKAR BROTHERS PVT. LTD. ….... RESPONDENT. Ms. A. Dessai, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Srinivassan, Advocate for the respondent. MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 196 OF 2012 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXPANAJI, GOA. …... APPLICANT. V/s.M/S. VELINGKAR BROTHERS PVT. LTD. ….... RESPONDENT. Ms. A. Dessai, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Srinivassan, Advocate for the respondent. STAMP NUMBER (APPLN.) NO.304 OF 2012 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXPANAJI, GOA. …... APPLICANT. V/s. M/S. AUTOMOBILE CORPORATION OF GOA LTD., SATTARI. ….... RESPONDENT. Ms. A. Dessai, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. M. S. Sonak, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM :- S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & U.V. BAKRE, JJ. Date :- 15[th] February, 2012. P.C. :- In all these applications on board, the applicants seek condonation of delay in filing the review petitions, seeking review of the orders, passed in the subject-appeals. 2. It is vehemently argued on behalf of the Assessees that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try these applications, because in law no review is maintainable. Ms. Dessai appearing on behalf of the Revenue would urge that there is a distinction between seeking condonation of delay in filing a review and maintainability of the review itself and, therefore, this Court is not called upon, at this stage, to rule on the maintainability of the review petition. 3. Bearing in mind that there is an issue of jurisdiction and maintainability of the review petitions, we are of the opinion that the interest of justice would be served if the delay in presenting the review petition is condoned, but by specifically keeping open objections of the respondents/assessees to the maintainability of the said petitions. 4. Therefore, keeping open all contentions on the point of jurisdiction and maintainability, the delay is condoned. Misc. Civil Applications stand allowed, accordingly, but, without any direction to pay costs. Place the review petitions for admission on 19[th] March, 2012. S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. ssm. U.V. BAKRE, J.