Rp/467/2020 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Ii v. M/S Narrottam Enterprises

:1: R.P.No.467 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA ON THE 17[th] OF JUNE, 2022 REVIEW PETITION No. 467 of 2020 Between:-PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX II, AAYKAR BHAWAN,WHITE CHURCH ROAD, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) .....PETITIONER (BY MS. VEENA MANDLIK, ADVOCATE ) AND M/S NARROTTAM ENTERPRISES A-5, BLOCK 2, NEW SIYAGANJ,PODDAR PLAZA, MAL GODOWN, VIP ROAD NO.1, INDORE(MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENT (BY SHRI M.K. CHOUDHARY, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI ANAND PRAPHAWALKAR, ADVOCATE) …............................................................................................................................. This petition coming on for order this day, JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR passed the following: ORDER This Review Petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 read withSection 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed by theIncome Tax Department for re-calling of the order dated 31.10.2019 passed by this Court in ITA No.95/2017. 02.The said Income Tax Appeal was filed by the appellant-IncomeTax Department under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961, whichcame to be dismiss by this Court on a concession given by the counselappearing for the appellants on the basis of the Circular dated 6.9.2019. 03.The Case of the review petitioner is that when the matter waslisted before this Court on 31.10.2019, for consideration of the CBDTCircular No.17/2019 dated 8.8.2019, in continuation of CircularNo.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018, by which the monetary limit of thedepartment’s appeal was re-fixed to Rs.1 crore, certain other appealswere also listed before this Court on their maintainability. However,subsequently, when the aforesaid order was passed by this Court on31.10.2019, it came to the knowledge of the Department that thepresent appeal does not fall within the ambit of the aforesaid Circulardated 8.8.2019 despite that the appeal tax effect to the tune ofRs.57,00,000/- was involved, as it falls under the Exceptional Clausein 10(c) of Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.7.2018. Para 10 (c) of the Circular reads as under:- “10. Adverse judgments relating to thefollowing issues should be contested on meritsnotwithstanding that the tax effect entitled isless than the monetary limits specified in para3 above or there is no tax effect. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx following issues should be contested on meritsnotwithstanding that the tax effect entitled isless than the monetary limits specified in para3 above or there is no tax effect. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (c)Where Revenue Audit Objection in thecase has been accepted by the Department.”case has been accepted by the Department.” :3: R.P.No.467 of 2020 04.Thus, the case of the review petitioner is that the instant case fallsunder the ambit of Exceptional Clause 10(c) of the Circular as RevenueAudit Objection was accepted by the Department and accordingly, re-assessment proceedings were completed and thus, the appeal needs tobe decided on merits despite the fact that the tax involved is Rs.57Lakhs only. Thus, it is submitted that the order dated 31.10.2019 be re-called and ITA No. 95/2017 be restored to its original number. 05.Shri M.K. Choudhary, learned Senior counsel for the respondenthas submitted that the aforesaid order passed by this Court on31.10.2019 reveals that it has been passed not only on the concessionmade by the counsel appearing for the appellants but also at theinstance of the counsel for the appellants only, who had soughtwithdrawal of the appeal and in such circumstances, no review liesagainst such order. 05.Shri M.K. Choudhary, learned Senior counsel for the respondenthas submitted that the aforesaid order passed by this Court on31.10.2019 reveals that it has been passed not only on the concessionmade by the counsel appearing for the appellants but also at theinstance of the counsel for the appellants only, who had soughtwithdrawal of the appeal and in such circumstances, no review liesagainst such order. 06.On due consideration of the rival submissions and on perusal ofthe documents filed on record, this Court is of the opinion that itappears that the aforesaid Income Tax Appeal has been disposed of bythis court recording concession of the counsel appearing for theappellants erroneously as on the same day other appeals were alsodecided by this Court and in such circumstances, even if this Court hasrecorded the concession of the counsel appearing for the appellants, itcannot be said that the order cannot be recalled because of suchprocedural mistake. 07.In view of the same, this Court finds force with the contentionraised by the counsel for the review petitioner. Accordingly, the order :4: R.P.No.467 of 2020 passed by this on 31.10.2019 is hereby recalled and I.T.A.No.95/2017is restored to its original number. 08. Registry is directed to list I.T.A.No.95/2017 accordingly. 09. With the aforesaid, the Review Petition stands disposed of. 10. A copy of this order be kept in I.T.A.No.95/2017. (Subodh Abhyankar ) (Pranay Verma) JUDGE JUDGE moni MONI RAJU Digitally signed by MONI RAJU DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=6fb601f03d4083a3289219d85392bac3bde1be8a53bd80aeba7af5a5244844c1, pseudonym=85E21E23646B47526A49E99D9182D0AE8ABD62D1, serialNumber=3BFD07BEC0C790E4AEA8CB122D629549D1067813B2AE8FB016F1BF08EE881126, cn=MONI RAJU Date: 2022.06.22 10:11:34 +05'30'