M/S RAJDEEP BUILDCON PVT LTD vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ZONE)-1

STA/12/2022HC KarnatakaKAHC01047898202207 July 2026Author: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND59 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

This judgment consolidates multiple Sales Tax Appeals (STA Nos. 3/2023, 11/2022, 12/2022, 2/2025, 5/2025, and 7/2025) before the High Court of Karnataka. The appeals challenge orders passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (SMR Authority). The cases involve various assessees, including M/s. R. R. Gold Palace Private Limited, M/s Rajdeep Buildcon Pvt Ltd, M/s. P. S. Tech Com Private Limited, M/s H R Sathish, and M/s Dhruvedesh Meta Steel Pvt Ltd. The tax periods under dispute range from April 2010 to March 2011, 2016-17, April 2015 to March 2016, April 2008 to March 2009, April 2011 to March 2012, and 2007-2008. The core of the dispute revolves around reassessment orders and subsequent revision orders passed by the SMR Authority.

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that for STA No. 07/2025, the revision order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the SMR Authority under Section 64(1) of the KVAT Act was barred by limitation. The original order was dated 28.02.2015, and while a letter calling for records was issued on 11.01.2018 (within four years), the revision order itself was passed beyond five years from the original order. Therefore, the order was set aside. Similarly, for STA No. 05/2025, the revision order dated 21.10.2024 was found to be barred by limitation as it was passed beyond five years from the order dated 13.09.2019 sought to be revised. Consequently, this order was also set aside. For STA No. 2/2025, the revision order dated 31.07.2024 was held to be barred by limitation, being passed beyond five years from the order dated 29.09.2018. This order was also set aside. In STA No. 03/2023, the appeal was allowed in part, and the order of the SMR Authority dated 16.11.2022 was set aside and remitted for fresh consideration. The substantial questions of law were left unanswered. In STA No. 11/2022, the appeal was allowed, and the order of the SMR Authority dated 29.06.2022 was set aside. In STA No. 12/2022, the appeal was partly allowed, with some questions answered in favour of the assessee and others in favour of the revenue, and the order of the SMR Authority dated 28.06.2022 was set aside to the extent indicated.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide on the legality and sustainability of the revision orders passed by the SMR Authority under Section 64(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act, 2003, particularly concerning the grounds of limitation. 1. Whether the revision order passed by the SMR Authority under Section 64(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003, in STA No. 07/2025, dated 30.04.2024, is barred by limitation, considering the original order was dated 28.02.2015 and the notice was issued on 08.01.2020? 2. Whether the revision order passed by the SMR Authority under Section 64(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003, in STA No. 05/2025, dated 21.10.2024, is barred by limitation, considering the original order was dated 13.09.2019 and the notice was issued on 08.05.2024? 3. Whether the revision order passed by the SMR Authority under Section 64(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003, in STA No. 2/2025, dated 31.07.2024, is barred by limitation, considering the original order was dated 29.09.2018 and the notice was issued on 16.03.2024? Assessee's Contention: The assessees argued that the revision orders passed by the SMR Authority were barred by limitation as they were passed beyond the prescribed period from the date of the original orders or appeal orders sought to be revised. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's specific arguments on limitation for each case, but implicitly, the revenue sought to uphold the revision orders passed by the SMR Authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 64(1),Section 39(1),Section 72(2),Section 36,Section 66(1),Section 9(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 - AND 3 OTHERS

Reserved on : 23.04.2026 Pronounced on : 07.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

SALES TAX APPEAL No. 3 OF 2023 C/W SALES TAX APPEAL No. 11 OF 2022 SALES TAX APPEAL No. 12 OF 2022 SALES TAX APPEAL No. 2 OF 2025 SALES TAX APPEAL No. 5 OF 2025 SALES TAX APPEAL No. 7 OF 2025

IN STA No. 3/2023

BETWEEN:

1.

M/S. R. R. GOLD PALACE PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI R RAMESH, PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS M/S. R. R. GOLD PALACE, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932. R VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 - AND 3 OTHERS

HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 88, SAMPIGE ROAD, BETWEEN 6TH AND 7TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE – 560 003. …APPELLA

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 72(2)

All 31 judgments and leading authorities on Section 72(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →