Dismissed¶26

B.L. Agrawal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1)

Chhattisgarh HC21 Aug 2025REVP/238/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Review petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to file separate review petitions; common order dated 03.04.2025 in TAXC No. 110/2017, 105/2017, 109/2017, 111/2017; Registry default on separate review petitions; B.L. Agrawal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Raipur; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; 22.08.2025; Vivek Tankha Sr. Adv.; Hemant Gupta CGC.

What did the court decide?

Dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to file separate review petitions for each case. ¶26

B.L. Agrawal Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:42579-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

REVP No. 238 of 2025

¶6

B.L. Agrawal S/o Ram Kumar Agrawal Aged About 58 Years R/o Mayur Bhawan Near Radha Krishna Saw Mill, New Timber Market Fafadih Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Digitally signed by VASANT VASANT KUMARDate: KUMAR 2025.08.22 17:28:48 +0530

¶11

--- Respondent

¶12

(Cause title is taken from the CIS)

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Tankha Sr. Advocate (appeared through video conferencing) along with Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Hemant Gupta, CGC

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶17

¶18

22.08.2025

¶19

Heard Mr. Vivek Tankha Sr. Advocate (appeared through video conferencing) along with Mr. Krishna Tandon, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hemant Gupta, Central Government Counsel for the respondent.

¶20

By way of this review petition, the petitioner has sought following prayer :

¶21

“In view of the order dated 03.04.2025 passed in TAXC No.110/2017, 105/2017, 109/2017 and 111/2017 may be recalled/review after giving due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner in the interest of justice.”

¶22

The instant review petition filed by the petitioner against the final judgment and order dated 03.04.2025 passed by this Court in TAXC No. 110/2017, 105/2017, 109/2017 and 111/2017.

¶23

The default reported by the Registry that separate review petition are required to be filed for each case, whereas in the present case only one review petition has been filed against the order passed in different TAXC petitions, which were decided by the common order.

¶24