9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t writ petition also deserves to be dismissed for the same reasons and in the light of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 30.09.2015. - Decided against the petitioner - Writ Petition Nos. 21272-293/2016(T-RES) - - - Dated:- 25-4-2016 - Vineet Kothari, J. For the Petitioner : Sri. K. J. Kamath, Adv. For the Respondent : Sri. T. K. Vedamurthy, Aga ORDER The petitioner in the present case has laid challenge to the Notification No.FD 21 CSL 2014(II) dated 28.02.2014 which is quoted below:- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (Karnataka Act 32 of 2004), the Government of Karnataka hereby exempts with effect f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ought to the notice of the Court that on 30.09.2015, a learned Single Judge has dismissed the bunch of similar writ petitions laying similar challenge to the same Notification dated 28.02.2014 against which the appeals have been preferred by the petitioner before the Division Bench of this Court. He further submitted that later on, in an identical writ petition filed in W.P.No.16317/2016 (T-Res) (M. Srinivas Kumar vs. The State of Karnataka)., another learned Single Judge of this Court passed the following order on 11.04.2016 placing the matter before the appropriate Division Bench which is seized of the appeals in W.A.No.4893/2016 and connected matters, after obtaining necessary orders from the Hon'ble Chief Justice. Since similar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. I have heard the learned counsels. 6. This Court respectfully agrees with the submission at bar by the learned Additional Government Advocate for the Revenue and having gone through the detailed judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 30.09.2015 (Sri. M.Madhava Gowda vs. Under Secretary to Government and others) and other connected cases, dismissing similar writ petitions, this Court is of the opinion that the present writ petition also deserves to be dismissed for the same reasons and in the light of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 30.09.2015 and the relevant operative portion of the said judgment of learned Single Judge relying upon various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers holding licence in Form No.CL-9 operating in rural areas in comparison with liquor sold by a person operating a Boarding House and Lodge in a rural area holding licence in Form No.CL-7 would form separate class of dealers. The State Legislature in its economic wisdom of taxation having chosen to provide for levy of tax on liquor sold by certain licence holders, considering the potential for tax collection on the huge value addition while exempting others whose sale price is regulated by the MRP indicated on the label of the container cannot be construed as discriminatory. The classification of dealers based on value addition criteria for the purpose of tax levy and exempting the dealers based on area criteria cannot be held to be discri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
