Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (6) TMI 488

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e would not apply to the petitioner in the present case for the reason that the petitioner had not approached this Court to show that the assessment order is not done or reassessment has not been done after subjecting himself to the statement agreeing to pay the penalty amount, CF amount, the Entry Tax amount as well as the VAT amount, by subjecting himself to the compounding of the offence under section 82 of the Act, which deals with compounding of the offence and pursuant to such compounding of the offence, the entire case is closed and nothing survives in view of the fact that the petitioner has compounded the offence which is forthcoming by the records produced by him, which nowhere depicts that he had paid such amount by way of any pr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the year 2011-12. 4. Respondent No. 4, Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement), Belgaum, visited the petitioner firm, place of business on 08.02.2012 and after verification of the stocks found out that there was disparity in the value of stocks and the payment of tax. That is why the respondent issued notice under section 79 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, on 09.02.2012 to the petitioner directing the petitioner either to pay the amount or submit the consent letter for compounding of the offence. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had maintained all accounts and paid up to date tax, and not committed any fault or fraud or evasion of payment of Value Added Tax or the Entry Tax. It is contended .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he principles of natural justice and same requires to be quashed. 7. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondents contends that on verification of the purchase records and purchase invoices pertaining to the purchase made by the petitioner of Quimam , it was noticed that the petitioner has paid the Entry Tax at 1% for the year 2010-11 and 2011-12 treating the Quimam as raw material. Whereas, the Quimam being the scheduled goods under Sl. No. 96 of Schedule-1 to the Karnataka Entry Tax Act, 1979 is liable to tax at 2% for the said period. It is also contended that the dealer has not included the freight paid on the purchases of the said goods. Therefore, it is contended that the total value liable to Entry Tax at 2% comes to Rs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d and paid the VAT liability of Rs. 10,58,497/- by way of e-payment to the office of the LVO-400, Nippani, on 21.02.2012. Along with it he had discharged the Entry Tax liability of Rs. 1,73,356/- by issuing a cheque bearing No. 217979 dated 09.02.2012 in favour of LVO-400 Nippani. These documents which are forthcoming in the writ papers produced by the petitioner himself show that these amounts have been paid by compounding the offence. 9. It is also contended by the learned counsel for respondent department that the contention taken by the petitioner that the proceedings is not maintainable for want of jurisdiction is without any proper basis for the reason that the entire process has been initiated by issuance of notice, opportunity was p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ituated in the office of the Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Bengaluru. Therefore, respondent No. 4 is properly authorized by the Commissioner to conduct inspection of the business premises of the petitioner as per the assignment issued. Hence, the question of there being no jurisdiction or unauthorization by the competent authority is uncalled for and would not hold water. 11. It is also further contended by learned counsel for respondent that nothing material has been placed before the Court to show that there is apparent inherent violation of any fundamental right or violation of principles of natural justice, which would attract the filing of the present writ petition for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates