IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2008 / 27TH ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 183 of 2008(T) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.28518/2001 Dated 29/08/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION: ------------------------------------------------------------------- P.B. SIVADASAN, S/O. BALABHADRAN, PANICKASSERIL, BEACH WARD, ALAPPUZHA-12. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, ALAPPUZHA. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-3. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM. 4. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECTOR TAXES, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT FOR R1-4 SRI. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 28518 OF 2001 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J ============== R.P.No.183 of 2008 in O.P.No.28518 of 2001 ==================== Dated this the 18th day of July, 2008. O R D E R Adv. Sri. Geroge K.George took notice for the respondents. The counsel for the review petitioner submits that the writ petition is not infructuous and it happened to be dismissed as infructuous for want of proper representation from the side of the petitioner. So he prays the judgment may be reviewed and he may be given a chance to argue the matter on merits. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the respondents also. 3. I feel that it is only proper that the O.P. should be heard and disposed of on merits. Accordingly the review petition is allowed. The O.P. restored to file. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE bkn/-