Rp/100138/2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri. Mahalxmi Urban Co-Operative
High Court
22 Jan 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karhcdharwad
Parties
Rp/100138/2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri. Mahalxmi Urban Co-Operative
Date of order
22 Jan 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Rp/100138/2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri. Mahalxmi Urban Co-Operative, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22 DAY OF JANUARY, 2018
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA
R.P. NO.100138/2017
BETWEEN :
1.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD BELAGAVI. DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD BELAGAVI.
2.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.1, GOKAK. WARD NO.1, GOKAK.
(BY SRI : Y V RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE)
... PETITIONERS
AND :
SHRI MAHALAXMI URBAN
CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., APMC ROAD, MUDALAGI, GOKAK-591307, KARNATAKA.
... RESPONDENT
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION XLVII RULE 1 OF C.P.C. PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 21.09.2015 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN I.T.A. NO.100081/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, S.SUJATHA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In view of the order passed by this Court in R.P. No.100117/2017 dated 22.01.2018, this review petition deserves to be dismissed.
2.It is significant to note that this appeal is filed with an inordinate delay of 692 days. No satisfactory reasons are assigned to condone the delay. Hence, I.A. seeking condonation of delay has to be rejected.
3.Accordingly, review petition as well as I.A. No.1/2017 stands dismissed in terms of the order of this Court in R.P. No.100117/2017.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
hnm
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.
EaseValue