1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015 PRESENT HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR REVIEW PETITION NO.179 OF 2013 IN ITA NO.459 OF 2008 BETWEEN : 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), NO.59, HMT BHAVAN 4TH FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD GANGANAGAR BANGALORE 2. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) RANGE-16 NO.59, HMT BHAVAN 4TH FLOOR, BELLARY ROAD GANGANAGAR BANGALORE .PETITIONERS (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/S. ICE NETWORK (P) LTD., NO.647/10, BRINDAVAN COMPLEX RAJAJI NAGAR DR.RAJKUMAR ROAD BANGALORE 560010 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.S.PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) 2 THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING FOR REVIEW ORDER DATED 03/10/2012 PASSED IN ITA NO.459/2008, ON FILE OF HON BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE. THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, N.KUMAR J., MADE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this case, when this Court dismissed appeal preferred by revenue on ground being less than monetary limit, said order was challenged before Apex Court. Apex Court has passed following order: Delay condoned. Liberty is given to Department to move High Court pointing out that Circular dated 9th February 2011, should not be applied ipso facto, particularly, when matter has cascading effect. For that purpose, liberty is granted to Department to move High Court in two weeks. 3 2. In view of aforesaid Supreme Court order, this review petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for revenue submits that as question involved in this petition is of recurring nature, it needs to be heard on merits and decided. What Apex Court has said is, if any common principle is involved in subsequent group of matters or large number of matters, then case is to be decided on merits. 4. When this case is dismissed, Court has not looked into merits of case. No law is laid down, it was dismissed only on ground of monetary limits. If very same principle is involved in subsequent year or any subsequent group of matters or any large number of matters as pointed by Apex Court, certainly dismissal of those appeals only on ground of monetary limits would not come in way of this Court deciding said common principle involved 4 in any subsequent group of matters or any large number of matters. In that view of matter, we do not see any justification to review order. Accordingly, review petition is dismissed. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE HJ Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Bangalore / Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) Range-16, Bangalore v. Ice Network (P) Ltd