Karnataka High Court
M/S Tejas Networks Limited vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 April, 2022
Author: B. M. Shyam Prasad
Bench: B. M. Shyam Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.8005/2022 (T-RES)
BETWEEN :
M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,
COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,
SRI.VENKATESH GADIYAR,
SON OF SRI.H.VITTAL GADIYAR,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
NO.25, JP SOFTWARE PARK,
ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE I
HOSUR ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 100.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.ANNAMALAI S., ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 091.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
VTK-1, KALIDASA ROAD,
1ST MAIN, GANDHINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 009.
2
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES,
(AUDIT)-4.8, DVO-4,
VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAYA-2,
NEAR NATIONAL GAMES VILLAGE,
RAJENDRANAGAR, KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU - 560 047.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.C.N.MAHADESHWARA, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE RE-ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.03.2021
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 UNDER SECTIONS 39(1),
72(2) AND 36(1) OF THE KARNATAKA VALUE ADDED TAX
ACT, 2003 BEARING ASSIGNMENT NO.150734922 /
08.03.2018 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A, ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The petitioner has inter alia called in question the endorsement dated 25.03.2022 [Annexure 'C'] issued by the third respondent informing the petitioner that the petitioner's application for rectification is rejected. The petitioner's grievance with the impugned order need not be traversed in detail in view of the fact that the 3 petitioner's grievance could be addressed if the merits of the endorsement dated 25.03.2022 are considered.
2. After the Assessment Order dated 31.03.2021, the petitioner is issued with proposition notice. The petitioner has responded to such notice by filing an application for rectification under Section 69 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003 (for short, 'the KVAT Act'). The petitioner in this application has stated that an amount of Rs.12,76,507/- is disallowed as Input Tax Credit on goods purchased from M/s.Harmony International on account of de- registration, but the said dealer has obtained fresh registration with effect from 28.07.2016 and has filed the returns and paid taxes regularly. The petitioner's purchases from this dealer are only from 18.08.2016 onwards.
4
3. Further, the petitioner has also sought for rectification as regards the taxes levied at the rate of 14.50% on a sum of Rs.17,72,21,651/- towards difference between Local Sales declared as per VAT 100 and E-Sugama generated during the relevant year. The petitioner has also availed the appellate remedy as against the Assessment Order dated 31.03.2021. The petitioner's application for rectification is rejected by the endorsement dated 25.03.2022. The endorsement refers to the gist of the petitioner's request and it reads as under:
"We are in receipt of the Assessment order U/s.69 of KVAT Act, 2003 for the year 2016-17 and we have noted certain aspects in this assessment order, which requires rectification and hence this application before your good selves. In this regard, may we be permitted to submit the documents for your kind consideration and favourable order.
In view of the above, we request you to kindly accept the above and pass the 5 rectification order and issue us revised order at the earliest."
4. It becomes obvious on a reading of the petitioner's application for rectification and the endorsement dated 25.03.2022 that there is complete non-application of mind as the petitioner's specific case is not even recorded properly. Further, it is undisputed that the petitioner had to be given an opportunity of hearing before taking a decision on the application for rectification and as such, opportunity is not extended.
5. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the endorsement dated 25.03.2022 [Annexure 'C'] must be quashed and the petitioner's application restored for re-consideration by the third respondent with liberty to the petitioner to place further material if so desired and to appear before the third respondent without further notice. Therefore, the following: 6
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed in part;
(ii) The endorsement dated 25.03.2022 is quashed and the petitioner's application for the rectification dated 19.04.2021 (as per Annexure 'L1') is restored for consideration;
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the third respondent without further notice on 09.05.2022 and the petitioner shall be at liberty to file additional documents to justify the contentions of the rectification application.
(iv) Consequently, the notice under Section 45 of the KVAT Act dated 29.03.2022 as per Annexure 'D' is also quashed, but with liberty to the authorities to take statutory recourse after a decision on the petitioner's application for rectification.
Sd/-
JUDGE RK/-
Ct: SN