Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Manjara Shetkari Sah. Sak. Kar. Ltd vs Cit, Aurangabad on 23 April, 2014
ÐT 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2680 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.620 OF 2010
MANJARA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
AURANGABAD ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2678 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.708 OF 2010
SHRI DNYANESHWAR SAHAKARI
SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2679 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.664 OF 2010
MANJARA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
AURANGABAD ..RESPONDENT(S)
2
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2681 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.625 OF 2010
AGASTI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2682 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.634 OF 2010
SHRI DNYANESHWAR SAHAKARI
SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2683 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.637 OF 2010
MANJARA SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
AURANGABAD ..RESPONDENT(S)
3
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2684 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.700 OF 2010
MANJARA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2685 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.666 OF 2010
MANJARA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2686 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.669 OF 2010
RAHURI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
BOMBAY ..RESPONDENT(S)
4
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2757 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.650 OF 2010
KOPERGOAN SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2759 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.626 OF 2010
KOPERGOAN SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2760 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.624 OF 2010
ASHOK SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
5
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2762 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.722 OF 2010
ADHINATH SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2763 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.724 OF 2010
ADHINATH SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2764 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.721 OF 2010
ADHINATH SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
6
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.2768 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.723 OF 2010
ADHINATH SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.3197 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.660 OF 2010
LOKNETE BALASAHEB DESAI
SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.3198 OF 2013
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.670 OF 2010
RAHURI SAHAKARI SAKHAR
KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
PUNE ..RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO.12 OF 2014
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.645 OF 2010
SHRI DNYANESHWAR SAHAKARI
SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD. ..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I ..RESPONDENT(S)
7
O R D E R
There are inordinate delays in filing all these review petitions for which no satisfactory explanation has been rendered. Accordingly, the applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the review petitions are dismissed. However, we have gone through the order sought to be reviewed. On consideration of the material placed before us we do not find any error apparent on the face of the record which calls for review of our order dated 20.01.2010. Accordingly, the Review Petitions are dismissed both on the ground of delay as well as on merits.
........................J. (H.L. DATTU) ........................J. (K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN) New Delhi, April 23, 2014.
8
CHAMBER MATTER SECTION IIIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2680 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL
620/2010
MANJARA SHETKARI SAH. SAK. KAR. LTD Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
CIT, AURANGABAD Respondent(s)
WITH REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2678 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 708/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2679 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 664/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2681 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 625/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2682 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 634/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2683 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 637/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2684 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 700/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2685 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 666/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2686 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 669/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2757 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 650/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2759 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 626/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2760 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 624/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2762 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 722/2010 9 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2763 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 724/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2764 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 721/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 2768 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 723/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 3197 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 660/2010 REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 3198 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL 670/2010 AND WITH REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 12 OF 2014 IN CIVIL APPEAL 645/2010 (With appln(s) for c/delay in filing review petition) Date: 23/04/2014 These Petitions were circulated today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN By Circulation UPON perusing papers the Court made the following O R D E R The Review Petitions are dismissed on th ground of delay as well as on merits, in terms of the signed order.
(G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) Court Master Asstt.Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file)