Rp/220/2022 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-6 v. M/S Samsung R And D Institute Bangalore Pvt Ltd

Digitallysigned by CMALATHILocation:High Courtof Karnataka IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26 DAY OF MAY, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD REVIEW PETITION NO. 220 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU. BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(1), BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. CIRCLE 6(1)(1), BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANMATHI E I., ADVOCATE) AND: M/S SAMSUNG R AND D INSTITUTE BANGALORE PVT LTD NO 2870, PHONEIX BUILDING BAGMANE CONSTELLATION BUSINESS PARK OUTER RING ROAD, DODDANEKUNDI CIRCLE BANGALORE 560037 PAN . …RESPONDENT (NOTICE NOT ORDERED IN R/O RESPONDENT) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC TO REVIEW JUDGMENT DATED 30/11/2020 PASSED IN ITA NO. 622/2017. THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J, MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, office objection is ignored. 3. This review petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment dated 30.11.2020 passed in ITA No.622/2017. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue submits that the substantial question of law No.2 has not been answered in the judgment dated 30.11.2020 passed in ITA No.622/2017. 5. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under: “In view of preceding analysis, the substantial questions of law framed by a bench of this Court are answered against the revenue and in favour of the asessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.” 6. Thus, it is evident that both the substantial questions of law have been answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. The judgment dated 30.11.2020 passed in ITA No.622/2017 does not suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record, warranting interference in exercise of the review jurisdiction. 7. In the result, review petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2