Rp/163/2022 Of M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
24 Jun 2022 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Rp/163/2022 Of M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
24 Jun 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Rp/163/2022 Of M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: In the result, review petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF JUNE 2022 PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
REVIEW PETITION NO.163 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
M/s. IBM INDIA PVT. LTD., No. 12, SUBRAMANYA ARCADE BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 029.
(By SMT. VANI H., ADV. H)
...PETITIONER
AND
1 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LTU, C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU. LTU, C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU.
2 . THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(1), C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU.
…RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE NOT ORDERED IN R/O RESPONDENTS )
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 R/W SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO. I) TO REVIEW JUDGMENT DATED 03/11/2020 PASSED IN THE ABOVE ITA NO. 392/2011 ONLY IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AT SL. NOS. 4 AND 5 AND FINDINGS IN PARAGRAPH 4, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. II) ANY SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEMED FIT AND JUST.
THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Ms.Vani.H., learned counsel for the petitioner.
This review petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment dated 3.11.2020 passed in ITA No.392/2011.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we find that the impugned judgment neither suffers from any infirmity nor any error
apparent on the face of the record, warranting interference of this Court in the review jurisdiction.
In the result, review petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
JY/-
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