Karnataka High Court
M/S Deccan Mining Syndicate Private Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 30 June, 2014
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
Bench: B.V.Nagarathna
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014
: BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
W.P.Nos.25413/2014 AND 28314-324/2014 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S DECCAN MINING SYNDICATE PRIVATE LTD
S-7, 2ND FLOOR, ESTEEM ARCADE,
NO.26, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY MR.ANITHA R JAIN,
DIRECTOR, AGE 48 YEARS. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI: KRISHNA MURTHY.R, ADV.)
AND:
1.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES,
(AUDIT) 1.6, D.V.O-1, TTMC BUILDING,
YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE
2.THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL
TAXES IN KARNATAKA
VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA
1ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 009
3.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
FINANCE SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE-560001 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: S.V.GIRIKUMAR, AGA)
THESE W.Ps ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER OF RE-ASSESSMENT, THE ORDER LEVYING PENALTY
AND INTEREST AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL NOTICE OF DEMAND,
ISSUED IN FORM VAT-180, ALL DTD.29.3.2014 PASSED BY THE
R-1 UNDER SECTION 9(2) OF CST ACT READ WITH SECTION
-2-
39(1) OF KVAT AND SECTION 9(2) OF CST READ WITH
SECTION 39(1), 72(2) AND OF THE KVAT ACT, PERTAINING TO
THE ASSESSMENT PERIODS COMMENCING FROM APRIL, 2007
AND UP TO MARCH 2008 (ANNEXS-E AND F RESPECTIVELY).
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The orders of re-assessment passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - respondent No.1 passed under sub-section (2) of Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ("the CST Act" for short) read with sub-section (1) of Section 39 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the KVAT Act") (Annexures-E and F) are assailed in these writ petitions.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Government Advocate, who appears for respondents on advance notice and perused the material on record.
3. At the outset, learned Addl. Government Advocate has drawn my attention to the fact that, in respect of the Assessment Years 2007 and 2008, the first respondent has -3- passed re-assessment orders under sub-section (1) of Section 39 of the KVAT Act. As against that order, the petitioner has availed remedy by way of an appeal provided under Section 62 of the said Act. He, therefore, contends that the petitioner cannot be permitted to assail the re-assessment orders passed under the provisions of the CST Act read with the KVAT Act with regard to the Central Sales Tax before this Court as the very same appellate remedy is available as against the impugned order. The contention is, therefore, that the petitioner ought to be permitted to avail of the appellate remedy. The fact that the petitioner has filed appeals against the order of the first respondent, with regard to re-assessment made on the returns filed by the petitioner under the provisions of the KVAT Act, 2003 is not disputed. In that view of the matter, the writ petitions are dismissed as not maintainable as the petitioner can very well avail of the appellate remedy with regard to re-assessment order passed under the provisions of the CST Act also.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that within a period of two weeks from today, the -4- petitioner shall file an appeal before the appellate authority.
5. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record, there being no objection to the same by the learned Addl. Government Advocate.
6. In the result, the writ petitions are dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail of the statutory remedy to assail the impugned order, if so advised, within a period of fifteen days from today.
7. The Registry to return all the certified copies of the annexures filed in these writ petitions forthwith subject of filing of copies for the purpose of record.
Sd/-
JUDGE S*