Partly allowed

Gita Refractories Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Karnataka HC10 Mar 2016WP/12319/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a preliminary hearing, the Karnataka High Court directed the petitioner to produce a duplicate 'C' declaration form accompanied by an indemnity bond, as required under Rule 12(2) of the Central Sales Tax Rules, to seek consideration by the tax authority despite a lost original.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to produce duplicate 'C' declaration form with Indemnity bond; Authority to consider same.

Gita Refractories Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commercial Tax… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.12319 OF 2016 (T-CST)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

GITA Refractories Private Limited, #2, off Kalpana Chawla Road, 5^th Main, 4^th Cross, RMV 2^nd Stage, Bhoopsandra, Sanjaynagar, Bangalore 560 094. (Represented by its Vice President Sri. Narayandas Jaju, Major)

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(By Shri Krishnamurthy .R, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

The Commercial Tax Officer, (Audit) 5.1, DVO-5, V.T.K.-2, Room No.508, 5^th Floor, “B” Block, Koramangala, Bangalore 560 047.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(By Shri S.V.Girikumar, Additional Government Advocate)

¶15

¶16

This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the reassessment order and the demand notice even dated 10.2.2016 passed by the respondent authority under section 9(2) CST Act, read with Section 39(1) of the KVAT Act for the assessment period 20092010 vide Annexure-D and E and etc;

¶17

This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the court made the following:

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petition coming on preliminary hearing, is considered for final disposal. The learned Government Advocate is directed to take notice.

¶20

The petitioner has challenged a re-assessment order

¶21

passed by the respondent wherein he has declared a total interstate sales turnover of Rs.6,31,98,219/- and had claimed exemption in respect of direct export sales and it claimed concessional rates of tax by producing ‘C’ declaration forms except for the turnover of Rs.5,84,610/- wherein the original

¶22

‘C’ declaration form had been misplaced or lost. Therefore, the petitioner chose to file a duplicate of the ‘C’ declaration form

¶23

¶24

along with an affidavit, seeking to invoke Rule 12(2) of the Central Sales Tax Rules. The authority having rejected the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶25

It is pointed out by the learned Government Advocate

¶26

that the rule requires that in the event the original ‘C’ form is lost, it would be possible for an assessee to produce a duplicate accompanied by an Indemnity bond.

¶27

Hence, the petitioner is directed to produce a duplicate

¶28

‘C’ declaration form along with an Indemnity bond, which the Authority shall consider in due course and address the case of the petitioner in accordance with Rule 12(2) of the Central

¶29

Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957.

¶30

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶31

The learned Government Advocate is permitted to file his

¶32

memo of appearance within two weeks.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Gita Refractories Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gita Refractories Pvt. Ltd. v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Seebi Kempakka Vs the State of Karnataka

Ravishankar Mijar Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Apkon Crushers Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri G v Sujay Vs the State of Karnataka

N. Shantha Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Narasimha Reddy N Vs State of Karnataka