2020 (1) TMI 828 - HC - Income Tax

Rectification of mistake - HELD THAT - Considering the volume, frequency and other relevant things in respect of various transactions on the part of the assessee, having no hesitation in holding that it showed a substantial participation of the assessee in the shares as trading. In fact, the entire case sought to be made by the review-applicant, being the assessee, with regard to error apparent on the face of the record is based on paragraph 9 of the judgment under review, which on a plain reading clearly reveals that the Court merely recorded the contention of the assessee that had no reflection at all in respect of the ultimate analysis of the Court while arriving at a decision to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing review application, Review of judgment

Condonation of Delay in Filing Review Application:
The judgment addresses the Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 4140 of 2018, concerning the condonation of delay in filing a review. The court, after considering submissions by the advocate and perusing the application, found sufficient cause to explain the delay. Consequently, the delay in filing the review was condoned, and the application was allowed. This issue was resolved favorably for the applicant.

Review of Judgment:
In relation to Review Application No. 4143 of 2018, the court analyzed the review and concluded that there were no grounds to invoke principles akin to those under Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for reviewing the judgment and order dated 3rd March, 2017. The earlier Division Bench had dismissed the Income Tax Appeal Defective No. 124 of 2015 due to substantial participation of the assessee in trading shares. The review applicant contended an error apparent on the face of the record based on a specific paragraph in the judgment under review. However, the court determined that this contention did not impact the ultimate decision to dismiss the appeal. As a result, the review was found to lack merit and was dismissed accordingly. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the grounds for dismissing the review application, emphasizing the importance of substantial participation in trading shares and the lack of impact of the applicant's contentions on the final decision.

This comprehensive summary breaks down the judgment into the two main issues involved and provides a detailed analysis of each, preserving the legal terminology and significant phrases from the original text.