Rp/734/2023 Of M/S.sastha Gold Works v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 25 DAY OF JULY 2023 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1945 RP NO. 734 OF 2023 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.07.2023 IN WP(C) 10704/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER: 1M/S.SASTHA GOLD WORKS,VI/628B, VATTANATHRA, ALAGAPPANAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680302 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SHRI. RAJU K.S. BY ADV A.KUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ROOM NO. 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 1100032INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 2(1), AAYAKARBHAVAN, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001 BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RP No.734 of 2023 in WPC No.10704 of 2021 2 C.S.DIAS, J. ------------------------- R.P. No.734 of 2023 in W.P.(C.) No.10704 of 2021 ------------------------- Dated this the 25[th] day of July, 2023 ORDER The review petition is filed to review thejudgment dated 10.07.2023 in W.P.(C.)No.10704/2021. 2. The review petitioner's case is that, whenthe above writ petition came up forconsideration on 10.07.2023, due to aninadvertent mistake committed by its counsel, asubmission was made that the above writpetition be dismissed as ‘not pressed’. In fact,the counsel made the said submission, on thebonafide belief that he was representing W.P.(C.) No.30086/2021 and not the above writ RP No.734 of 2023 in WPC No.10704 of 2021 petition. The petitioner has valid contentions inabove writ petition. In the above background,the inadvertent mistake may be condoned andthe impugned judgment may be recalled,otherwise it will cause severe prejudice to thepetitioner. Hence, the review petition. 3. Heard; Sri.Kumar A., the learned Counselappearing for the petitioner and Sri. JoseJoseph, the learned Counsel appearing for therespondents. 4. Having considered the pleadings andmaterials on record, and after appreciating therival submissions made across the Bar, I acceptthe assertion of the review petitioner that it wasby a bonafide mistake committed by its counsel,that led to the dismissal of the above writpetition as ‘not pressed’. Hence, I am inclined RP No.734 of 2023 in WPC No.10704 of 2021 4 to allow the review petition. Resultantly, I order the review petition asfollows: (i) The judgment dated 10.07.2023 isrecalled and W.P.(C.) No.10704/2021 isrestored back to file. SKP/25-07 Sd/- C. S. DIASJUDGE