Rp/1544/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Dr Sumanth O.goel, 264, Tapovan

IN THRE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKCIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATHD THIS THR 8 DAY OF OCTOBBR 2012 PRBSENT THR HON’BRBLE MR. JUSTICK K.L.MANJUNAANT THR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICEK B. MANOH RP NO. 1044/2012 (ITA) BRTWEEN$ 1.THR COMMISSIONBR OF INCOME TAXKHIMJIBHAIT COMPLEX, OPP: CIVIL HOSPITALBRLGAUMKHIMJIBHAIT COMPLEX, OPP: CIVIL HOSPITALBRLGAUM 2.THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(INV)WARD-1,GOKAK.WARD-1,GOKAK. ... PETTTIONERS (By Sri. : Y V RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AN Dr. SUMANT O.GOEL,264, TAPOVANSHIVABASAVANAGAR, BELGAUM. — RBSPONDENT THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED U/O. 47 RULE 1OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND)ORDERDT:08.04.2011 IN I.T.A. NO.1245/2006, ON THE FILE OFTHR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BBRENCH DHARW AL This petition coming on for hearing this day, theCourt made the following: ORDER The appeal was disposed of on 8/4/2011.Though the Court was of the opinion that the appeal hasto be allowed and the matter has to be remanded tor theTribunal for fresh consideration. In para 5, it is wronglytyped as ‘dismissed’ instead of ‘the appeal is allowed’. 2. Be that as it may, in view of the circularNo.3/2011, the appeal filed by the revenue itself was notmaintainable. Therefore, the appeal requires to bedismissed as not maintainable. In similar matter, thisCourt has granted liberty to the revenue to approach thisCourt for re-opening of the judgment, if the Hon’ble ApexCourt were to hold that the circular in question isprospective in nature and not affects the appeals or anymatters pending prior to the circular No.3/2011,Therefore, we have to allow this review petition anddismiss the appeal on the’ ground of maintainability.Accordingly, review petition is allowed. Consequently,ITA No.1245/2006 is dismissed. ��@�� �-0�90;8(�*3�7*;*36�1-0�)0?*0<�/01*1*23�*.�8;.2 42392309� �9!������ �9!������ '5=