High Court Karnataka High Court

Grasim Industries Limited vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By The … on 31 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Grasim Industries Limited vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By The … on 31 March, 2009
Author: K.L.Manjunath And Rahim
  '«{.§§  -E§'::i:i<3,g (ix ?ar'frifige, fifivacatas)

m THE HIGH com? 0:? KmHm§$;*e:g5"j%%»}.L% H
omen}? mama AT aimawam  w   '

§fi'I'E5 THIS mm 31% pays? m;R7c}:1'2k)§9  ' ~ M'

TEE Hoxmm hm. atiszfxcfi' L-._ Mfigwmgra  '

1':-{E §iQ3\¥'EL§i§  _«JiIST§_€:;E: gawafn Maia

3.323.? figs? 4: {gawk

iZ3~:1"'¢as.:-;§§m"'T§n;*§.%.j?nS'{:iéf;#';"fiémited "
{ I} ivim, Bfiizi ' E:--:1,::3:°r1.a¥10.na}:V_Marlaathzg Csrpn .}
§{umar&pama3éu.:£3.8A1»T.1§:1£§  _
Ravmi' ;¥3is§riCa;_ i<i;a:z'1'1:::\a%;.:--1}{s; 
f3€pI'€S€i1f§€Ci Ezafsiri A  
fissistant iZ§~r=;_n::::?a;i Maaéger {Legal}
 3113:5331 Hegde V
..     ----------   §*E'3"i"'£'I$HE1%

Tigié Sééifi éf Kamaiaka
Rfipfésifmifid by Ehfi

=  .. Cgmmissionsr Qf Commerciai "'§'axc~:§§
" _'i2'9;:1ijya 'I'ha1:ig€ Kazyaiaya
ifizfiiciasa Réafl, C%a:r1.dhinagar

 Bazagalare 560 099

. .. RE8?GHDE1'§'I'

{By Sré. K. G. Aéhyapak, fififij



23m? fxieai was 23 {1} 9f the KS'? Ac: {ha
Judgment and zorder éated {38.()'?.:ZG()5 passrgii  STA

Nt:;.2;;"S'?O/ 2094 on ma ms: of the. Kma:ggg'«--.'gp_ge.§::g:a_

Tribunai, Ba_t1gaiv::sre, digmissing the agpeal.

'flies: STEP C2:::ming 0:1. ~fcaf'_ "?Tf{.ifi$_'.'.":".(i§"3i§,7,V 

RAKJUNATH. J, mania the fcflowiingz  j

9m._..._%Rn%i=: 

The subgiantial qu;c'§.3'éii23;1'VV.»_Vc«f 'im€_ Hafises for
consideration in this apgiesl is:  j u

'whetherythe cef§e€_'bfiax3_pu:~<:%1:aéfcri by the assesses

and expéfigéd aé; csifaée "'§3r:;a'r:i"*;.=_.ftér curring hag is be

1v:{:on;S?fi5£:iw§:d..VV_ as <3-né-.V.and.' ths sama and whetgher {ha
assesses' '~f;€%"c}aim fixerizgtiozz 11:1d{*::'* Ssctian

593$    um t_:sT*.;éc::?5

"   Lfitgring §h£"';idursa of a'rgum€m:s, it is brought $.23 ihfi

 L' V§:§$€i:.:e"-.;jfi" . f'.1::<§V 'uisarfied Smiioz: Cognac}; appearing fog' the

firifiiiaxzer  the queséisfl 0:" iaw .i2;:%;02ve:§ in fiiifi Revisiazz

 ?€ti'ii.:.:»:§'§s §q:;a1t1}? cavemfi by the fifaégmeni af this if';{3ur': in

V'   mm 'E'E& ::w., 153, sm'ra Q? E{§sRNz?xT,A§{;% dated

°;;?§1.20as in STEP M33; 2095, whfirein a Bivifiien Bench

u  #3' this Court, in which 6118 of us {KLMJ) is 3 party has mica

that {ha bangs' cczfiiefi, uncumfi ctafiéét or a Cfigfifi hearty are 03:15

%/



and the SS-11116 anci the asssssea is emitled fer €:x@_I:33.§"é*i§5:§LVV

unstier Sectian 5(3) of the CST Act.

3. Accordingly, the substailtiétl cfi§£svti0n'i}1Vé:$ 

ham: heki in favmir of tha petitig)ner'i.:;"'the affixfcsgid éa$7(:, 'V

Since the facis in this case are oizgégarxd £116 sama'; nit: aiiswer

the questian of law fr*am:%{i..,haI*ei:1"VL.f:g.v;§$u: of tEé"as§esse¢.
In the result, the Revfiion  ivyfiflflwfid and 'dim
orcler passerzi     Tribunai dates}
09.04.2007

1 4:fl§3ls;:’3’n ‘ §1:) é.sseri by the Joint
comm’ssi£;na- 4′ cf;a§:;§i:;:if-» (}8.{3’}7,_;?;i3=f§iZ:”{ in appeal N0. sm

257%/2084 .Af£:1 é§1{.r€ and ‘B’ are hereby quashed.

. «. A learnsd ASA is permitted to {:13

43¢”-9

Sd/-E
Judge

Sd/~
Judge

3311*