Rp/638/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 v. Mukesh Sharma

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPURBEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU &HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH ON THE 16[th] OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 REVIEW PETITION No. 638 of 2020 BETWEEN:- DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 (1),BHOPAL, DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYAPRADESH) (BY SHRI SANJAY LAL - ADVOCATE) .....PETITIONER ANDMUKESH SHARMAR/O B-99, RAJYA VIDHI COLONY, KOLAR ROAD,BHOPAL, DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYAPRADESH) (NONE) .....RESPONDENT This petition coming on for consideration of I.A. No.3045/2021-an application for condonation of delay this day, JUSTICE SHEEL NAGUpassed the following: ORDER I.A. No.3045/2021, an application u/S. 5 of the Limitation Act forcondonation of delay is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasonsmentioned therein. Delay of 75 days in filing the review petition is hereby condoned. This petition has been filed by the Revenue-Income Tax Departmentseeking review of the order dated 27.11.2019 passed in I.T.A. No.17/2015whereby the said I.T.A. had been withdrawn by the Revenue on the wrong assumption that the tax effect involved is less than Rs.1,00,00,000/- (RupeesOne Crore). Learned counsel for the Revenue has taken us to the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 30.01.2013, a perusal of whichreveals that the tax effect appears to be much more than Rs. One Crore andtherefore, the provisions of Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by theGovernment of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CentralBoard of Direct Taxes (Judicial Section), New Delhi were inapplicable to theITA. In view of above, an error apparent on the face of the record appears tohave crept in the order under review. Consequently, this Court exercising its review jurisdiction allows thisreview petition and restores I.T.A. No.17/2015 to its original number to belisted for admission. Let a copy of this order be placed along with the record of I.T.A.No.17/2015. (SHEEL NAGU)JUDGE @shish (VIRENDER SINGH)JUDGE