9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 1076 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxIssuance of notices - proper jurisdiction to issue notices - HELD THAT - The notices have been issued by the competent authority under the provisions of Act 2003. The notices have not been issued by an authority who is not having jurisdiction in the matter - in view of the decision in the case of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VERSUS KUNISETTY SATYANARAYANA 2006 (11) TMI 543 - SUPREME COURT , as the authority who has issued the show cause notice is having jurisdiction to do so, a mere issuance of show cause notice does not infringe the right of the present appellant and therefore, the question of interfering with the show cause notice does not arise. Appeal disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to order dated 28.01.2020 under Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Interpretation of jurisdiction in issuing show cause notice. Application of precedent judgment in STRP No.82/2018. Justifiability of dismissing writ petition with liberty to reply to notices. Direction to Assessing Officer considering previous judgment. Analysis: The appellant filed a Writ Appeal against an order dated 28.01.2020 under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The notices issued on 12.12.2019 for assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17 raised concerns regarding unpaid taxes by the seller. The appellant contended being a registered dealer purchasing goods from another registered dealer. The appellant rushed to court upon notice issuance under Section 39(1) of the Act, seeking liberty to explain the situation. The appellant argued that the issue was settled in a previous judgment, STRP No.82/2018 dated 26.02.2021, involving The State of Karnataka vs. M/s.Tallam Apparels. The Court examined the Single Judge's order and affirmed the competent authority's jurisdiction in issuing the notices. Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in Union of India vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana, the Court emphasized that a mere show-cause notice does not infringe rights unless issued by an incompetent authority, and a writ lies only when a final adverse order is passed. Based on the above legal principles, the Court found no grounds to interfere with the show cause notices, as the issuing authority had the requisite jurisdiction. The Single Judge's decision to dismiss the writ petition with liberty to reply was deemed justified. However, the Assessing Officer was directed to consider the precedent judgment in STRP No.82/2018 (The State of Karnataka vs. M/s. Tallam Apparels) while making the final decision. Consequently, the Writ Appeal was disposed of with the instruction that if a reply is submitted within four weeks, the Assessing Officer must take it into account without the time spent in court affecting the limitation period for issuing the final order.
|
