Tax revision on whether chargers in composite mobile phone packs can be taxed separately at a different rate under KVAT Act. Following a Co-ordinate Bench decision in STRP No.8/2022 holding no valuation mechanism exists to split composite packages, the High Court dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:10946-DB STRP No. 52 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
SALES TAX REVISION PETITION NO.52 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ADITYA VIKRAM BHAT, AGA)
AND:
Digitally signed by A K CHANDRIKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SRI.KISHAN KUMAR PROPRIETOR M/S HINGLAJH TELECOM SBM CIRCLE CHITRADURAGA – 577 501
…RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS STRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.65(1) OF THE KARNATAKA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT, 2003, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.11.2021 PASSED IN STA NOS.317/2018 AND 318/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2018 PASSED IN APPEAL NUMBERS-KVAT/AP/62/2017-18 AND KVAT/AP/63/2017-18 ON THE FILE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS), DAVANAGERE DIVISION, DAVANAGERE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard Sri. Aditya Vikram Bhat, learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners. Respondent is served but unrepresented. Perused the petition papers.
follows:
"27. A bare perusal of the Section 4 (charging section) of KVAT Act and Rule 3 (computation provision) of KVAT Rules would clearly indicate that there is no prescribed mechanism provided for determining the value of individual goods in a composite transaction. Thus, in the absence of a valuation mechanism, tax cannot be levied differently on each of the component by separating a single composite package."
NC: 2024:KHC:10946-DB STRP No. 52 of 2022
Following the decision dated 10.02.2023 in STRP No.8/2022 and connected matters; the present revision petition also stands dismissed in the above terms.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
SMJ CT:JR LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 18
1 issue framed by the court
Whether mobile phone chargers sold with a mobile phone in a composite pack attract tax at the same rate as mobile phones.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
STRP No.8/2022Followed¶2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) Davanagere Division
The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-1) Chitradurga
Sri. Kishan Kumar, Proprietor M/s Hinglajh Telecom
S.G.Pandit
C.M.Poonacha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
