IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25'?" DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2009
PRESENT
THE HONBLE MR.JL¥STICE V.GOPALA C.
AND
THE I-iON'BLE MRSJUSTICE:.E3.V;:I€.'1GARTXTHN2X'if-..__
w.A.No.169ra'/'QQOQEKST3 A
BETWEEN:
M/S OSCAR UDYOG LIMI'1'E_D _ " .
No.47/3, 48/2, BYATARAYABEA PURA."v1L:;Ae-E
YELAHANKA Ho:5LI-, _SA§{-IAI{Af?.z&NAG:AR; '
BANGALORE PfEp::;EsENimD"'BY'11S'--D'ImracToR,
SRI MADAN3-L13;L«._B1OT£jIRA.,--.$ON 012*-~ SR1 PUNAM
CHAND BO'11:IR;%x';»'_ " A '
560092C
E ...APPELLANT
{By 314:: RAG" FOR s PART}-:AsARATH1, ADV.)
'L "-VTSTA'I--'§3---OE? KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ETS SECRETARY
' DEFARTMENT OF FINANCE
GO_'JER1KEMENT OF KARNAKA,
T ' 4_ VIDHANA SOUDHA.
-_ fag. AM-BEDKAR VEEDH-I
BANGALOER 560 001
E THE COMMISSONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES
VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA
GANDHINAGAR
BANGALORE 560 009
\\u/
3 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCLAL TAXES
LVO £50, LAKSHMI COMPLEX.
SESHADRIPURAM
BANGALORE 560 020
{By Sri: T P SRINIVASA, AGA.}
WRIT APPEAL FILED U/'s_'4 OF T15-IE-KARNATAKA
HEGH COURT ACT PRAYING _S.E'F.._ASIDE .f1fHI«:_? ORDER
PASSED IN THE WRFr'~~1I§E'1'1'r1oN---_1~io;'3778/2009 DATED
16/03/2009. - 2
This WA. on this day, GOPALA
GOWDA J, de.1i--iJer--:§d_--the foiioyvin_g:--f&* . V
appeai vVise'Vic1iree.t;ed.against the order of the learned
single 2 16.3.2009 passed in
.,W.P.._fi~0.;3?'f8/20A09('Fe----E%es} deciaring to exercise discretion of
y_'pr1:\«2{re':r., the order dated 14.5.2008 passed by the 3"?'
resp0ndent'V'..i;n:der Section 25(2) KVAT Act read with Rules
136 ua;icit..13'7 of KVAT Ruies, 2007 dated 15.3.2008 with an
A '1~.0j"ohsewation appiying the circular to the earlier order of
' registration passed by the 3rd respondent in exercise of its
0′ wjoower after giving effect to the registration w.e.f 1.4.2005 is
reviewed by its order dated 14.5.2008 by giving its effect
from 10.3.2006 not earlier from the eariier date appiying the
\/
circular issued by the Commissioner of Sales Tax in exercise
of power under Section 59 of the KVAT Act with retrospective
effect.
2. The learned Single Judge
legal contentions urged’ on behalffpthefappellant ‘him ” C
to avail the .alterna.tilvif3–. remedy under
Section KVAT Act. No alteiiiatixre available against
the order dated order giving
effect to establishment
from lay the 3rd respondent
giving ifeglstifettvioll of the appellant dealer with
effect with the provision of
secticgn”25{2} lofthe in exercise of discretionary power
no.3. Giving effect to the circular dated
by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax
Dflpartnlfifitpllliiftth retrospective effect, by respondent no 3 is
“laad in On this ground alone the impugned order is
giliiableiito be quashed.
” Accordingly, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the
\»»/
order of the Eearned single Judge. The impugned order dated
14.5.2008 is quashed. Issue Rule.
KVN*