[The court established that a significant change in legal circumstances, such as a Supreme Court ruling, necessitates the examination of previously unaddressed legal questions in review petitions.]

ORDER

D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.1089/2019 in Civil Review Petition No.89/2019

D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.1078/2019 in Civil Review Petition No.85/2019,

D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.1079/2019 in Civil Review Petition No.86/2019,

D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.1080/2019 in Civil Review Petition No.87/2019

D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.1081/2019 in Civil Review Petition No.88/2019:-

1. These interim applications are filed by the assessee for condonation of delay in filing the review petitions in the impugned judgment dated 23.10.2017 passed by the Division Bench. It is pointed out that while disposing of the appeals of the assessee and allowing the same, the Division Bench had proceeded only on one ground mainly being the income of the appellant Urban Improvement Trust of Kota exempted under Section 10(20) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was pointed out that this judgment was carried in an appeal by the revenue and Supreme Court by judgment dated 12.10.2018 has reversed the decision. It is pointed out that this Court while disposing of the appeals, had not examined the another question raised by the assessee namely of the validity of reopening of assessment. Counsel for the appellant submitted that since the only ground on which this Court allowed the appeals of the assessee has been reversed by the Supreme Court, the need has arisen to examine the second question which was raised by the assessee and was also admitted by this Court. On account of this reason, the assessee has filed the review petitions.

2. Considering the averments made in the applications and those made out before us during the course of arguments delay caused in filing the review petitions is condoned. The applications stand disposed of.

D.B. Civil Review Petition Nos. 89/2019, 85/2019, 86/2019, 87/2019 and 88/2019:-

3. Since certified copy has been produced in one of the cases requirement for production of certified copy in rest of the cases stands dispensed with. Rest of the defects overruled.

4. Upon hearing the learned advocates for the parties we notice that appeals were admitted on the question whether the tribunal was correct in not declaring the reassessment proceedings as nullity. While disposing of the appeals, the Division Bench proceeded to examine the merits of taxing the income of the assessee in view of Section 10(20) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Division Bench ruled in favour of the assessee and consequently did not go into the question of correctness of reopening of assessment. The Revenue challenged this judgment before the Supreme Court. Supreme Court has reversed the view of Division Bench. Thereupon the assessee seeks a declaration on the question of validity of reopening of assessment. Since this question was not decided by the Division Bench and was kept open, the same shall have to be answered for which purpose the appeals of the assessee are revived. Without disturbing the judgment of the Division Bench which is already reversed by the Supreme Court, we revive all the appeals of the assessee and post for final hearing in due course on the following substantial question of law which was already framed at the time of admitting the appeals previously:-

"Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Id. Tribunal was justified in not declaring the reassessment proceedings and the consequential assessment order passed thereto as nullity?"

5. The review petitions are disposed of accordingly.

Pending applications if any also stand disposed of.