Rp/982/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd
High Court
25 Aug 2022 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · mphc_db_jbp
Parties
Rp/982/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
25 Aug 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Rp/982/2020 Of Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd, 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
Signature Not Verified
SAN
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 25[th] OF AUGUST, 2022
REVIEW PETITION No. 982 of 2020
Between:-
DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-191),BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ASHUTOSH UPADHYAY - ADVOCATE)
AND
M/S ANDRITZ HYDRO PVT. LTD., BHOPAL, D-17M PAKVN INDUSTRIAL AREA, MANDIDEEPBHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI MUKESH AGRAWAL - ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi
Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:
ORDER
For the reasons assigned, I.A.No.4 of 2021 seeking condonation of delayin filing the review petition is allowed. The delay is condoned.
This petition is filed seeking review of the order dated 18.10.2019 passedby this Court in I.T.A. No.146 of 2014 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 of 2019 dated08.08.2019.
Signature Not VerifiedSANDigitally signed by PREM SHANKARMISHRADate: 2022.08.26 13:38:21 IST
Learned counsel for the respondent disputes the same.
O n 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 18.10.2019 passedby this Court in I.T.A.No.146 of 2014 is reviewed and recalled. I.T.A.No.146of 2014 is restored to its file.
(RAVI MALIMATH)(VISHAL MISHRA)CHIEF JUSTICEJUDGEpsm
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.