Karnataka High Court
M/S Gina Developers Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 July, 2012
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
WP 9065-81/2012
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
W.P.No.9065-81/2012 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/s.Gina Developers Pvt.Ltd.,
No.330, Double Road,
(Next to Bank of Baroda)
Ist Stage, Indiranagar,
Bangalore-38,
Rep.by its Managing Director
Tomy Thomas. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri B.G.Chidananda Urs., Adv.)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Rep.by its Finance Secretary,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore-560 001.
2. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial
Taxes (Audit-52), DVO-5,
5th Floor, VTK-2, B Block,
Koramangala,
Bangalore-47. ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri T.K.Vedamurthy, HCGP)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying for extension of stay of recovery of
disputed tax, against the deemed stay granted by operation of
Section 62(3)(c)(ii) of KVAT Act, 2003 and etc.
WP 9065-81/2012
2
This petition coming on for preliminary hearing-B group
this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner on the office objection raised. Office objection is overruled.
2. Having regard to the short question that arises for consideration, with the consent of the learned Counsel, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. Petitioner has filed an appeal before the Joint Commissioner for Commercial Taxes (Appeals) against the assessment order passed by respondent No.2. The appeals are numbered as VAT-AP-809-825/11-12. These appeals have been presented on 01.07.2011. While filing the appeal, petitioner, as asserted by him, has deposited 50% of the tax and for the remaining amount of 50%, he has furnished bank guarantee. Petitioner had also filed an application seeking grant of interim stay of the operation of the order of assessment. The said application, according to the petitioner, is kept pending.
4. It is the contention of the petitioner that by virtue of the operation of Section 62(4)(c)(ii) of the Karnataka Value Added WP 9065-81/2012 3 Tax Act, 2003, where any application filed for stay of recovery proceedings of any tax or other amount has not been disposed of by the Appellate Authority within a period of 30 days from the date of such application, it shall be deemed that such an order of recovery of such tax or other amount subject to payment of one half of the tax and other amount disputed and furnishing sufficient security to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority in regard to the other half of such tax is stayed. According to the petitioner, he has already paid 50% of the tax and has given bank guarantee in respect of the remaining amount of tax assessed. Therefore, it is contended that he has the benefit of an interim stay as per the deeming clause enacted under Section 62(4)(c)(ii). However, the said interim order has expired and in terms of Section 62(4)(d) & (e) of the Act, the interim order will not be in operation beyond the period of 240 days. It is in this background, petitioner seeks extension of the interim order granted contending inter alia that the delay in disposal of the appeal is not on account of the omission attributable to the petitioner.
5. Though Section 62(4)(e) is now deleted with effect from 01.04.2012, the fact remains that this appeal was presented WP 9065-81/2012 4 and the interim order granted has expired before Section 62(4)(e) came to be deleted. In such circumstances, I am of the considered view that the interim order deserves to be extended till the disposal of the appeal. However, it has to be made clear that the Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal expeditiously, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Until the disposal, interim order of stay is extended, provided petitioner keeps the bank guarantee alive till the said date.
6. Writ petition stands disposed of in terms stated above.
Sd/-
JUDGE KK