9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... even against an order passed under section 63A subsequent to August 1, 2008. Revision petition is allowed. - STRP No. 104 of 2011, Misc Cvl No. 7233 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 5-4-2011 - KUMAR N. AND RAVI MALIMATH JJ. K.P. Kumar, Senior Counsel for M/s. King Partridge for the petitioner T.K. Vedamurthy, Additional Advocate-General, for the respondent ORDER The assessee has preferred this revision petition challenging the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal which has held that the appeal preferred by the assessee under section 63 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is not maintainable. The assessee is a non-banking finance company registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned order contends that, section 63A was introduced on April 1, 2006, by way of an amendment. On August 1, 2008 the appeal provision was extended to the orders passed under section 63A. However, during this interregnum period, section 63 did not contain express words authorising an appeal under section 63A. However, sub-section (4) of section 63A made the orders passed under section 63A final subject to sections 63 and 64. A harmonious reading of these provisions make it very clear that, even in the absence of an express provision in section 63, an appeal against an order under section 63A was maintainable. The order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal is too technical and it is liable to be set aside. Per contra, the learned counsel fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it final cannot take away the power of judicial review of the High Court under article 226 of the Constitution. In view of the amendment to section 63 incorporating a provision to make the order passed under section 63A as appealable under section 63 and the fact that the right of the assessee to challenge the order under section 63A before this court cannot be disputed, in the facts of the case, we are of the view that the justice of the case would be met by remanding the matter back to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal which has the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal under section 63 even against an order passed under section 63A subsequent to August 1, 2008. In that view of the matter, we pass the following order: (a) Revision petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
