Rp/119/2022 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 v. M/S Tayana Consult Private Limited

Digitallysigned byPRAMILA G VLocation:HIGH COURTOFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REVIEW PETITION NO. 119 OF 2022INI T A NO. 298 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7, BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BMTC COMPLEX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SANMATHI E I, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S TAYANA CONSULT PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.3155/A, 11 MAIN,2 STAGE, NEAR ESI HOSPITAL,INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 038,PAN . …RESPONDENT (BY SMT GEETHA RANI K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NARENDRA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CODE OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO: (A) REVIEW JUDGMENT DATED 28/08/2019 IN ITA NO. 298/2019 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE PETITIONER-APPELLANT TO BE HEARD INDEPENDENTLY AFRESH. (B) TO PASS SUITABLE ORDERS THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO BE GRANTED IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS THIS DAY, R DEVDAS J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard Shri. E.I. Sanmathi, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners and Smt Geetha Rani K, learned Advocate for Sri Narendra Kumar for the respondent. 2. Shri. Sanmathi, adverting to Instruction No.17/19 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes) pointed out that the order impugned in this review petition has been dismissed on the ground that the tax effect is less than Rupees One Crore and the said bar does not apply to the instant case as the case falls under exception clause relating to revenue audit objection. 3. We have perused the Circular. Shri. Sanmathi is right in his submission. Therefore, this review petition merits consideration. 4. Hence, the following: ORDER (a) Review Petition is allowed. (b) ITA No.298/2019 is restored on Board and Registry shall place it before the roster Bench. (c) If the respondent has any objections to raise regarding the documents filed at the hands of the review petitioner, such objections is permitted to be regarding the documents filed at the hands of the review petitioner, such objections is permitted to be raised in the main appeal after restoration. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE BRN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1