Rp/678/2012 Of M/S. Bimbis Creams & Bakes v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/20TH BHADRA 1934 RP.No. 678 of 2012 () IN ITA/1369/2009 --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA.1369/2009 DATED 29-03-2012 REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------- M/S. BIMBIS CREAMS & BAKES KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY SMT. SOUDHA GAFOOR, PROPRIETRIX. BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SMT.NISHA JOHN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR RESPONDENT(S)/APPELLANT: ----------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COCHIN. BY ADV.SHRI.P.K.R.MENON, SR.SC FOR INCOME TAX SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-09-2012, ALONG WITH R.P.NO.680/2012 IN ITA NO.982/2009 THE COURT ON THESAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ. ....................................................................R.P.Nos.678 of 2012 in ITA No.1369 of 2009& 680 of 2012 in ITA No.982 of 2009....................................................................Dated this the 11[th] day of September, 2012. O R D E R Ramachandran Nair, J. These Review Petitions are filed by pointing out a mistake in the statement of facts in the judgment that both thesearched assessee and the assessee against whom assessmentmade under Section 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 werenot under the same Assessing Officer as on the date of search.However, admittedly, later the Commissioner transferred thejurisdiction based on place of location of business of theassessee, which led to the assessments of the searchedassessee under Section 158BC and the other assessee underSection 158BD of the Act by the same Assessing Officer. Wedo not find this as a mistake because the assessee has no casethat the Assessing Officer who completed the assessmentunder Section 158BD on the assessee concerned had no R.P.Nos.678 & 680/2012 -2- jurisdiction. Transfer of jurisdiction is purely anadministrative work of the Commissioner on which there canbe no mistake and the same does not arise from the order ofthe Tribunal. We therefore do not find any mistake in thejudgment. Consequently, these Review Petitions aredismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jg