Gauhati High Court
Review.Pet./72/2026 of ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES TINSUKIA Vs M/S GAYATRI DISTILLERS AND BOTTLING INDUSTRIES AND ANR. on 10 May 2026
GAHC010018692026 2026:GAU-AS:6411 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./72/2026 ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES TINSUKIA G.N.B ROAD, TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIM-786125 VERSUS M/S GAYATRI DISTILLERS AND BOTTLING INDUSTRIES AND ANR. A
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010018692026
2026:GAU-AS:6411
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./72/2026
ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES TINSUKIA
G.N.B ROAD, TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIM-786125
VERSUS
M/S GAYATRI DISTILLERS AND BOTTLING INDUSTRIES AND ANR.
A PROPERTIORSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT LAIPULI, P/O.
PANITOLA, TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786125
2:COMMISSIONER OF TAXES
KAR BHAWAN
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. B. Choudhury, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : None appears.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 11.05.2026
Heard Mr. B. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Review Petitioner.
2. The present review application has sought review of the judgment and order dated 21.01.2025 passed in WP(C)
Page No.# 2/2 No.6003/2024 and other analogous writ petitions.
3. This Court has perused the grounds on which the review has been sought for.
4. It is a trite principle of law that for the purpose of exercise of the review jurisdiction, either of the three conditions have to be satisfied i.e., (1) that there is an error apparent on the face of the record while passing the judgment and order; or (2) when materials comes to light which the review petitioner could not place at the time when the impugned judgment and order was passed in spite of due diligence and; or (3) for sufficient reasons.
5. The grounds on which the instant review application have been filed, in the opinion of this Court do not satisfy any of the three conditions for reviewing the judgment and order dated 21.01.2025 passed in WP(C) No.6003/2024 along with connected matters.
6. Under such circumstances, the instant review application stands rejected, without prejudice to the contentions so raised in the review applications in respect to other proceedings.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant