Miscellaneous Civil Application v. Aryamanbuilders & Developers, Nagpur

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.761/2015 IN I.T.L.NO. 105/2013 (D)(THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR-1 VERSUS ARYAMANBUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, NAGPUR) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's ordersappearances, Court's orders of directionsand Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A. Parchure, counsel for the applicant.Shri N.S. Bhattad, counsel for the respondent. CORAM : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIKANDA.S. CHANDURKAR,JJ. DATE:FEBRUARY 15, 2016. By this review application, the applicant-TheCommissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur-1 seeks a review of the orderdated 11.06.2015. It is stated on behalf of the applicant that there is alittle difference in the facts in the case of Commissioner of IncomeTax Versus Vandana Properties, reported in 2012 (76) BTR 363and the facts involved in the present appeal. It is submitted thatthe difference in the set of facts involved in the case of VandanaProperties and the present appeal was noticed by the Department,after the order was passed. No ground has been made out for reviewing the orderdated 11.06.2015 as the said order is passed on the statementsmade by the learned counsel for the original respondent-Assesseeand the concession by the counsel for the applicant-Department.On a reading of the review application, we do not find that anyground is made out for reviewing the order dated 11.06.2015 inIncome Tax Appeal No.105 of 2013. The miscellaneous civil application stands disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE