Case LawHigh Court › Order v. M/S. Ranka And Ranka, Itano.319...

Order v. M/S. Ranka And Ranka, Itano.3191/2005Disposed Off On22.11.2011

High Court 21 Sep 2012 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Order v. M/S. Ranka And Ranka, Itano.3191/2005Disposed Off On22.11.2011
Date of order
21 Sep 2012
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Order v. M/S. Ranka And Ranka, Itano.3191/2005Disposed Off On22.11.2011, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: Reserving such liberty, this petition!is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
- - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREDATED THIS THE 21[ST|]DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH REVIEW PETITION No.809/2012 IN ITA No.74/2007 BBRITWRE 1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CHNTRAL CIRCLEC R BUILDING,QUEENS ROAD,BANGALORE.2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 12 (2),CR BUIDLING,QUEENS ROAD,BANGALORE. —. PRHTITIONBRS (BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/S SILVER LINE INFORMATIONSYSTEMS PVT LTDNO.337, I] FLOOR, KARUNA COMPLEXSAMPIGH ROADMALLSWARAMBANGALORBE-560 00 —. RESPONDENT THIS REVIBW PRTITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING FOR REVIEW THE ORDER DATED19.03.2012 PASSED IN ITA 74/2007, ON THE FILE OF THEHON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE. THIS RBVIBW PRTITION COMING ON FOR ORDERSN. KUMAR, J.,MADE THR FOLLOWING: - ORDER The Revenue is seeking to review the order passedby this Court on 19.3.2012 whereunder this Courtdismissed the appeal on the ground that the net taxeffect which is the subject matter of the appeal was lessthan Rs.10,00,000/- by following the judgment of thisCourt in the case ofTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S. RANKA AND RANKA, ITANo.3191/2005disposed off on22.11.2011 2. Itis submitted that the revenue is preferring anappeal against the order passed by this Court holdingthat the instruction No.3/2011 is retrospective innature and therefore they submit that this petition hasto await the decision of the Apex Court in the aforesaidappeal to be filed. - - 3. On that ground it is not possible to keep thismatter pending. All that we can do is, as the appeal is|dismissed following the judgment in the aforesaid caseof M/s. Ranka and Ranka, in the event of the ApexCourt setting aside the said order and holding it asprospective, then it is open to the revenue to seek forreview of the order. Reserving such liberty, this petition!is dismissed. In that view of the matter, we do not seeany justification to condone the delay. Sd/- JUDGE PpSd/- JU DG NG*
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan