M/S. PAN PARAG INDIA LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

PDF · subscribers
WP/49083/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01011353201628 November 2016Bench: VINEET KOTHARI5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to interfere with the impugned rectification order. It noted that a regular appeal against the order had already been heard by the appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a rectification order passed under Section 69 of the KVAT Act. This order was passed pursuant to a previous High Court direction for a speaking order. A regular appeal against the rectification order was already filed and heard by the appellate authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the High Court should interfere with a rectification order when a regular appeal against it is pending and has been heard by the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 62

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

WRIT PETITION NO.49083 OF 2016(T-KVAT) AND WRIT PETITION NOS.51172-51196 OF 2016(T-KVAT)

BETWEEN:

M/S.PAN PARAG INDIA LIMITED (A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 2013) SURVEY NO.120/4, ALUR VILLAGE POST, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH – 562 162 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SRI. ANIL KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS. ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI K.J.KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR M/S.KAMATH & KAMATH, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, AUDIT-6.4, DVO-6, III FLOOR, KIADB BUILDING, 14TH CROSS, PEENYA, BENGALURU – 560 058.

Date of Order 28th Nov, 2016 in W.P. Nos.49083 of 2016 & W.P.Nos.51172-96 of 2016 M/s. Pan Parag India Ltd, Vs. The Dy. Commr. Of Income tax & Anr.

2.

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (APPEALS)-6, DVO-6 BMTC BUILDING, DOUBLE ROAD, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI T.K.VEDAMURTHY, AGA)

*****

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED RECTIFICATION ORDER DATED 05.07.2016 PASSED IN PROCEEDING AT ANNEXURE-B BY R1 HOLDING THE SAME AS ONE HAVING BEEN PASSED WITH TOTAL DISREGARD OF THE SPECIFIC DIRECTION OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.33992/2016 TO PASS A SPEAKING AND REASONED ORDER AND TO DIRECT R1 TO PASS A REVISED SPEAKING ORDER BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09.08.2016 AT ANNEXURE-D OF THE PETITIONER REQUESTING THE R1 AND RE-CONSIDER THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION FILED SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF PATENT ERRORS IN THE RE- ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 04.05.2016; ETC.,

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Date of Order 28th Nov, 2016 in W.P. Nos.49083 of 2016 & W.P.Nos.51172-96 of 2016 M/s. Pan Parag India Ltd, Vs. The Dy. Commr. Of Income tax & Anr.

O R D E R

The petition has been filed against the order dated 05.07.2016, passed in exercise of powers of rectification under Section-69 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act 2003) by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit)6.4.

2.

This order was passed in pursuance of the directions given by this Court on 27.06.2016, while disposing of Writ Petition No.33992/2016, directing the said authority to pass a speaking order and the earlier order dated 13.06.2016, passed under Section-69 of the KVAT Act was set-aside.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before the Court that against the impugned rectification order Section–69 of the Act, passed on 05.07.2016, a regular appeal under Section-62 of the KVAT Act, 2003 has already been filed before the learned

Date of Order 28th Nov, 2016 in W.P. Nos.49083 of 2016 & W.P.Nos.51172-96 of 2016 M/s. Pan Parag India Ltd, Vs. The Dy. Commr. Of Income tax & Anr.

4 second respondent – the Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)–VI, and he has already heard the appeal finally on 2.8.2016. But the orders are still awaited. He also sought to assail the merits of the impugned rectification order dated 05.07.2016.

4.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order in any manner inasmuch as a regular appeal against the same has been heard by the concerned Appellate Authority – Respondent No.2 and any observations on merits of the case may prejudice the interest of either of the parties, the petitioner-assessee or the respondent-Revenue on the other hand.

5.

Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of without any observations on the merits, with a sanguine hope that the Appellate Authority – respondent No.2 will release the order in consequence of the hearing of the

Date of Order 28th Nov, 2016 in W.P. Nos.49083 of 2016 & W.P.Nos.51172-96 of 2016 M/s. Pan Parag India Ltd, Vs. The Dy. Commr. Of Income tax & Anr.

5 appeal, which is said to have taken place on 02.08.2016, as expeditiously as possible.

SD/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →