w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Gold Finch Hotels Private Limited v/s The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-1.7), Dvo-1

    Writ Petition Nos. 51975 to 51986 of 2013 (T-RES)

    Decided On, 22 November 2013

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

    For the Appellant: K. Aravind Kamath, Advocate. For the Respondent: S.V. Giri Kumar, Additional Government Advocate.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: These W.Ps are filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order Dt.21.10.13, vide Ann-A passed by the Respondent, holding the same as one having been passed without the authority of law, by issuing a writ of certiorari.)

1. The order of the respondent dated 21-10-2013 (Annexure-A) passed u/s 39(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and the endorsement dated 14-11-2013 (Annexure-D) issued by the said authority are assailed in these writ petitions. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate who appears for the respondent on advance notice and perused the material on record.

2. Admittedly, the petitioner did not produce the books of accounts pursuant to the notice issued by the respondent in reassessment proceedings u/s 39(1) of the Act. The petitioner thereafter filed an application dated 11-11-2013, seeking declined of the reassessment order. By endorsement dated 14-11-2013, the request for rectification has not been entertained by stating that as the petitioner had not produced the books of accounts for verification nor responded to the notice issued u/s 39(1) of the Act and the reassessment has been made having no other alternative. The endorsement issued for rectification shows that there are no apparent mistakes in the reassessment order and therefore, the application for rectification cannot be considered.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner requests that an opportunity be given to the petitioner on the application filed by the petitioner seeking rectification of the reassessment order, so that the books of accounts could be produced for verification of the respondent. As the reassessment order as well as the endorsement impugned in these writ petitions have been passed without looking into the books of accounts, the only relief that could be granted to the petitioner is, to permit its representative to appear before the respondent-authority, so that its application seeking rectification could be considered after verifying the books of accounts to be produced by the petitioner. In that view of the matter the endorsement dated 14-11-2013 at Annexure-D is quashed. The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent-authority on 2-12-2013 with the books of accounts and other records for verification of the respondent-authority. The respondent to consider the same and to pass appropriate orders in accorda

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

nce with law on the application for rectification sought by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from 2-12-2013. The order dated 21-10-2013 shall not be given effect till 2-12-2013 and thereafter till the disposal of the application for rectification filed by the petitioner.
O R