9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondents : Ms.Anushree Narain, and Ms.Renuka Anand, Advocates for Review Petitioner ORDER CM APPL. 15939/2024(Exemption) 1. Exemption is allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 15938/2024(condonation of delay of 97 days in filing); CM APPL. 15941/2024 (condonation of delay of 38 days in re-filing); REVIEWPET. 98/2024 and CMAPPL. 15940/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d is that "the Petitioner is a Government Department and a number of procedural formalities are involved in drafting, finalization and signatures of Petitions, including the present case". 7. As is apparent from the above, one of the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay in re-filing the review petition is the verbatim copy of the ground as stated in the application seeking c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est & Anr.: Neutral Citation No. 2023:DHC:5823-DB. 9. The learned counsel for the review petitioner now seeks to distinguish the case on the ground that the judgment rendered by the High Court of Kerala in Shabu George & Anr v. State Tax Officer & Ors. being WA No.514/2023 decided on 24.03.2023 has taken a separate view. This is not a ground to review the order dated 22.08.2023 as the decision in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s much amount of money kept in the house of M/s.Shabu as idle and not deposited at bank' and further 'the amount received as gift on the day of marriage has not been recorded in his income tax return and from this it is evident that the money is from illicit sources' reveal the extent to which authorities under the Act are misinformed of their powers and the limits of their jurisdictio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 26.08.2020. The said decision was also noted in the case of Deepak Khandelwal Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr. (supra). 13. Thus, in view of the above, we find no ground to review the order dated 22.08.2023. The application for condonation of delay (CM No.15938/2024) and the review petition are dismissed. The application for condonation of delay in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
