GROWMORE RESEARCH AND ASSETS MANAGEMENT LIMITED Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Growmore Research And Assets Management Limited
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) By this order I dispose the above two Review Petitions. The petitions seek review of a common order dated 12th July, 2019 passed in Miscellaneous
Applications no. 39 of 2017 and Miscellaneous Application no. 40 of 2017. By
the two miscellaneous applications the applicants who are notified parties
sought a direction against the income tax department to refund a sum of
Rs.33.6 crores and Rs.4.09 crores respectively. The order of which review is
sought rejected both these miscellaneous applications.
(2.) The review petitions are filed on the basis that there are mistakes of law and fact and that reliefs are to be granted to the review petitioners by virtue of
the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Harshad S Mehta vs.
Custodian [(1998) 5 SCC 1]. According to the review petitioners the revenue
being the income tax department has violated directions of the Supreme Court
contained in paragraph 39 of the judgment and have derived enormous benefit
to the detriment of the two review petitioners. The Review Petitioners contend
that in view of the directions contained in said paragraph 39 of the above
judgment, this Court was bound, even belatedly to secure refund of the amount
for the Review Petitioners.
(3.) The main ground for review is that the Review Petitioners are aggrieved by the findings which are rendered on the basis of the pleadings of the income
tax department which had filed affidavit in the miscellaneous applications.
Although the arguments of the Review petitioners were noted, the application
and reliefs have been misread and misunderstood and the real issue did not get
adjudicated due to the misleading averments in the replies filed by the revenue.
According to Mr. Mehta this is a gross error on the face of the record and
therefore he is entitled to seek review of the aforesaid order on the basis that
the revenue made misleading submissions before the Court on behalf of the
income tax department when the Court passed the order under review.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.