_ Gandhih agar, Bar1'galea;'e'¥09.
is sii 1<.R;iAatiiyapaR, A.G.A)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT
DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 21*" nAY OF JANUARY 2010 0%
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KoL€-"MANJXuN'fli}%I'
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE-v._AI?tAViND
S.T.A. No, 24/20t0~SV0{'iTaX'}.p'_ '
Between: ' .. T .. 0' u
M/s J.S.Mamadapur, _ .
CivilContractor,Badam_i; . .
Dist. Bagalkot, rep. By J.Sp.,t-Mathadapur.
'* .4 . --- Appellant
(by Sri Atul. Aiur .Tej,a$?athi, Advocates)
and V 0
T1fie'Additi§ji'ia1E Co:T_1mission--er«of
Commercial Ta'xes,_ " 2
Vanijya i'I'er'ige' 'Kai*})'al__aya, Zone I,
- Respondent
This s*.T.A. is iiied 11/S 24(1) of the K.S.T. Act against the
‘1jeV__ision”<9rder dated 36.09.2008 passed in No. ZAC-E/BGM/SMR/03»
V0 pp 04,_4'_4Si1\4£R~02/08«09 on the file ofAdd1. Commissioner of Commercial
Taxes, Zone»-I, Bangalore, setting aside the orders of appellant in all
respect and restoring the orders of re-assessment and assessment with
penalties and accordingly concluding the revision proceedings-.g'
This appeal coming on for hearing on interlocutozjflapplli.catlion.'_""'e V'
on this day, KL. Manjunath. I, delivered the following fodgineiit, « _ V
Judgment
1. Heard on Misc. CV1. No. 6585/2059′; There.is”iai-dellayllof 10
days in filing the appeal. Beingtsatisfi.ed ’cause in the
affidavit filed in support of the appli_cati.on,:pde’la}i days in filing
the appeal is condoned; .
2. Heard the learned.’:’counsel:’appearing for the appellant and
learned Governmeiit Advocate.’app:earing for the respondent. During
the..–co_urse v_ol3.argiuments is._.b_rought to our notice that the grounds in
thislappeal”i’s S.T.A. No. 23/2008 which has been dismissed
the judgment in ‘:3.N. Prasanna Kumar Vs.
~ Additional Coinraissioner for Commercial Taxes, Karnataka, zone-II,
V others reported in 2009 (67) Kar. L}. 5. Therefore the
Q,
La.)
1 is dismissed holding that no substantial question of law
present appea
arisein this appeal. ._ _
33D@s
bw