Dismissed

M/S. Sri Giri Bar and Restaurant v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Apr 2022WP/2859/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash tax endorsement, reassessment order, and demand notice, as the issues were already settled in W.P. No.10403/2021. However, considering the petitioner's bonafide belief regarding another filed petition, the Court deferred recovery proceedings for six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The recovery proceedings were deferred for a period of six weeks from the date of the order.

M/S. Sri Giri Bar and Restaurant Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.2859/2021 (T-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

M/S. SRI GIRI BAR AND RESTAURANT NO.20, HMT MAIN ROAD, SBM COLONY, MATHIKERE BENGALURU - 560 056 (REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI M.C. SRINIVASAIAH).

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. ATUL K ALUR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY KARNATAKA STATE EXCISE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VANIJE THERIGE KARYALAYA -1 KALIDAS ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)6.1, DGSTO-06, BENGALURU 560 058.

¶16

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR/ COMPANY SECRETARY KARNATAKA STATE BREWERIES CORPORATION LIMITED 4^TH FLOOR, TTMC, A BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING KH ROAD, SHANTINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.K. HEMAKUMAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI.S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE FOR R5)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 18.05.2020 ISSUED BY THE R-4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-K, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED; QUASH THE REASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 15.05.2019 ISSUED BY THE R-4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16, VIDE CAS NO.340137719, AT ANNEXURE-G IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED; QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 15.05.2019 ISSUED BY THE R-4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16, BEARING DEMAND NO. 183692949, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.

¶20

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, including the learned Additional Government Advocate, are heard and the records perused.

¶24

It is not contested that the questions canvassed by the petitioner in support of the different prayers have been answered by this Court in ‘ M/s. Alankar Bar and Restaurant v. State of Karnataka ’ in the writ petition in W.P. No.10403/2021 and connected matters which are decided on 22.12.2021. If similar contentions are considered, the decision in the aforesaid writ petition would apply in full force and therefore the petition should be dismissed.

¶25

¶26

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶27

submits that given the circumstances in which the petitioner has filed and prosecuted the writ petition in W.P. No.4889/2022, and the petitioner’s bonafide belief that this writ petition in W.P. No.4889/2022 is also disposed of by this Court with other similar writ petitions and certified copies are awaited, the recovery proceedings may be deferred for a period of six weeks so that the petitioner could avail the appellate remedy as against the dismissal of this petition.

¶28

Though this request is contested by the learned Additional Government Advocate, in the peculiar facts and circumstances with the petitioner filing another writ in W.P. No.4889/2022 under the belief that the earlier writ petition is disposed of, this Court is of the view that the recovery proceedings must be deferred for a period of six weeks. Hence, the following:

¶29

¶30

ORDER

¶31

[a] The petition is dismissed in the light of this Court’s order dated 22.12.2021 in the writ petition in W.P. No.10403/2021 and connected matters;

¶32

[b] The Authorities are called upon to defer the recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned order for a period of six [6] weeks from today.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

AN/-

M/S. Sri Giri Bar and Restaurant v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Sri Giri Bar and Restaurant v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Tra and Company Vs Additional Chief Secretary to Government

M/S. Abhiram Infra Projects Private Limited Vs the Commissioner

Etisalat Software Solutions Private Limited Vs the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer

Sri Manukuppe Chikkavenkataiah Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Rathnamma Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M/S Yojaka (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Asst Commissioner of Income-Tax