2025:JHHC:25242-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No.120 of 2024 ------ M/s Jharkhand State Cricket Association having it’s office at Keenan Stadium, Sakchi, Jamshedpur, PO & PS-Sakchi, District-East Singhbhum, Pincode-831001, through it’s secretary Sri Debashish Chakraborty aged about 61 years son of Late Srish Chandra Chakraborty, residing at 301, Hinoo House, upper Kilburn Colony, near UCO Bank, P.O. Doranda P.S. Doranda, Ranchi, Dist: Ranchi (834002) …. …. Respondent/Petitioner Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Patna havig it’s office at 2nd Floor, Central revenue Building, Birchand Patel Path, P.O. & P.S.-Patna, Distt. Patna-800001 ..... .... Appellant/Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manmohit Bhalla, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Kumar Vaibhav, Sr. S.C. Mr. Anurag Vijay, Jr. S.C. Mr. Saudamuni Gupta, AC to Sr. S.C. Mr. Durgesh Agarwal, Advocate ------ 02/Dated: 26.08.2025 I.A. No.11870 of 2024 1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 15 days in preferring the instant review petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Considering the sufficient cause as has been referred in the interlocutory application, the delay of 15 days in preferring the instant review petition, is hereby condoned. 4. Accordingly, I.A. No.11870 of 2024 stands allowed. Civil Review No.120 of 2024 5. The instant review petition has been filed for review of the order 2025:JHHC:25242-DB 2 dated 16.07.2024 passed in T.A. No.23 of 2019. 6. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the said petition, are required to be enumerated, which read as under:- (i) It is the case of the review petitioner that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) / respondent herein has moved before this Court in Tax Appeal No.23 of 2019 against the order dated 15.03.2019 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi in I.T.A. No. 158/Ran/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13 preferred by the respondent/review petitioner herein whereby and whereunder, the learned I.T.A.T. has allowed the said appeal and has held that the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not applicable to the respondent / review petitioner and has set aside the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) by which the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. 7. Learned counsel for the review petitioner has submitted that the order impugned dated 16.07.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court may be reviewed/recalled. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Income Tax has submitted that the similar issue has already been decided by the 2025:JHHC:25242-DB 3 Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Civil Review No.06 of 2025. 9. The aforesaid fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the review petitioner. 10. Submission therefore has been made by the respondent- Income Tax that the present review petition may be disposed of, in terms of the said order passed by this Court. 11. We have considered the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Civil Review No.06 of 2025. 12. We, after going through the prayer and pleadings made in the review petition, as also, the order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Civil Review No.06 of 2025, have found that the issue, which is the subject matter of the present review petition, has already been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid order, for ready reference, the relevant paragraphs of the said order are being referred as under:- “32. Be that as it may, this Court is of the view that since the Co-ordinate Bench has passed order on the concession given by the learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner and the matter has been remitted before the authority to decide afresh in view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, hence, this case is not coming under the fold of 2025:JHHC:25242-DB 4 the power which is to be exercised under the jurisdiction of review. 33. On the basis of the discussion made herein above and taking into consideration the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vrs. State Tax Officer (1) & Anr., (supra) and in the case of Rimpa Saha (supra) is of the view that no ground is available to review the order dated 11.07.2024 passed by this Court in T.A. No. 24 of 2019. 34. Accordingly, the instant review petition stands dismissed.” 13. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court is of the view that the identical matter has already been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Civil Review No.06 of 2025 and as such, there is no reason to take distinct view to that of the present case. 14. Accordingly, the instant review petition stands disposed of, in terms of the order dated 27.02.2025 passed in Civil Review No.06 of 2025. 15. In consequence thereof, pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Rohit/-A.F.R.