Case LawHigh Court › Rp/636/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Incom...

Rp/636/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. M/S Fine Builders

High Court 21 Jul 2022 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · mphc_db_jbp
Parties
Rp/636/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. M/S Fine Builders
Date of order
21 Jul 2022
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Rp/636/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. M/S Fine Builders, the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Hence, the review petition is allowed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRAON THE 21[st] OF JULY, 2022 REVIEW PETITION No. 636 of 2020 Between:- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 (1),BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) (BY SHRI SANJAY LAL - ADVOCATE ) .....PETITIONER AND M/S FINE BUILDERS, BHOPAL, E-4/43, ARERACOLONY, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) (BY SHRI ABHISHEK OSWAL - ADVOCATE) .....RESPONDENT This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri JusticeRavi Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following: ORDER For the reasons assigned, I.A.No.3834 of 2021 seeking condonation of delay in filing the review petition is allowed. The delay is condoned. This petition is filed seeking review of the order dated 18.11.2019 passed by this Court in I.T.A.No.37 of 2016 on the ground that a wrong concessionwas made by the learned counsel for appellant with regard to the statutory limitswhile preferring the appeal before this Court. That the appeal requires to beheard and is not covered by the Government Circular No.17/2019 dated08.08.2019. Learned counsel for the respondent disputes the same. On considering the contentions, we are of the view that the error isapparent on the face of record. The order was passed based on the erroneoussubmission made by the appellant's counsel with regard to the fact that theappeal is covered by the said Government circular regarding the financial limitsof preferring an appeal before the High Court etc. Hence, the review petition is allowed. The order dated 18.11.2019 passedby this Court in I.T.A.No.37 of 2016 is reviewed and recalled. I.T.A.No.37 of2016 is restored to its file. (RAVI MALIMATH)(VISHAL MISHRA)CHIEF JUSTICEJUDGEC Digitally signed by CHRISTOPHER PHILIP Date: 2022.07.22 18:00:35 +05'30'
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan