IN Ti»~§E HIGH coum" or KARNATAKAr~ L
CIRCUIT' sews:-1 AT DHARWAD j "
aA'rEr> THIS THE 3*" oxw OF MAs2c§i;2oé§ 3 4 %
BEFGRE
me Hom3LE MR.JusTIc*ér.4:;3HA;x: SH$N;fAAfSJjAv€v£3i3$AR*~V: %
wrm £>§TITIO¥',~.§ Nos,31éz;3--%3.1_85oX2a98(%..nr;§3
EETWEEN:
M] 3. £a.arkandc$i1%.va1" ' = V .
P.lE3.Road_.~ 'V ' , .
Ranebemizur . '
Hav€ri_I:§ist~. V.,__ V , " V
Rep.?;>y its l3?:--:;jrt;x1c«:ff " _
Gad3.:ges_happ.::1A.g8;Ciifv._ - . ..PE§'1'I'I'IGNER
{By S1*i'E_. f.So1':mAé"iZ;fiVi,
AN§_:.;»
. ¢ :jVfA.I{aI'I:al€.§}§s$1
" » 'VH3: its Priiztzjipai Secretary
_ ;_",3¢§§:<1f11::..:)f Finance:
C30'€?$ff1:l11€;tifQf Karnataka
" Vi(ii"3.:a3:1"a, Soudha
"'E%a::3.gaia;$ra«~ 1
V n Agéistant Commissioner sf
Rflommcrcial Taxes
LVO-350,
Ranebennur .. RESPQNBENTS
(By Sri E<i.B.z'-idhyapak, AGA)
These writ patitions are fi;:r;d:'e:1:" A_1'*fi'-:,:"1'<::'s'VV
227 of the Constitutimrx of E]3(iiE:2_, p;*aying_j1;m:;z:.ai_ssioxié;r.,¢ bf itommcrcial
Taxes, 1370-360, Ran:%bennu:¢;'i:1VLthe"-petitio11é:r's~c:ase for the
months ofJu1y 2005 .t{)'«.Z'~E0'.iie3;13vé:°.._i2.Q{)5 and January 2006
to March 2096 (AnIze:Cuirt:::=~}'§ i'Q= H)Vanda1so to quash the
consequential demand H f1Qtic£:s £11". P'Ot§?3,"' \«'A'I'~ 180 daied
7.3.1
.2008 iss1;£:d__i3y ?£§1eV’s2a¥id.’ir:s»;3o1:1d€::J.{ in the petitiormfs
case in reiaticfi 13;: ‘the’._ai3:’>1s::’saiti _m~v.5>’11¥hs (‘Annexurc:s~J to R),
etc. ” ‘ ” V V
_.’i’}3c%sé’*.§zii€:’1p<etiti:3i1s'comingbxi for orders, this day the
Cour; made"tt;:2 f<3i1Qwi:1g:_~ _ —
.bRnER
.'t}1e:…._1_€.'.«<«:=1*I1ec."1 counsel appearing an either
-éihce this Court in the case of Phiiips
..Ej(ec§Eré}:i¢s India Limited, fiwzgalore as. State af
A ._I{a;§nataka as others, reported 2009(66) KLJ 1 (H0)
V’ “flag heid ihai su15~se<::'£;i0n (3) cf Section 72 mi" Kalmataka
lfl
Adiied Value Act, 2003 (for short hereinafter referreci to
as $3516 'Act'; is déciared unconstitutional, the writ
petitian flied by the petitiarxer questi-3I1i11g the
orders dated 7.13.2008 passeé under
the Act, is entitied t{) be allmxsad. ; ?1jé » 1
foilowing order is made:–
Section 72(1) of ‘Eris declared
unconstitutianal in j.;;:iLAgn1¢11$: in Vthe case 0f
Philips Electronics.. ;L»i&i*ii Q.i1f,–“V”Bangalore vs.
stat: “of” 8» ‘ reported :2oo9(55;
(He). the impugned Grders dated
v§d;e_VAnIiéx1;g1’esV-}J gated 7.11.2008 stand quashad.
i..A’»§i:’i~tA.pe€.§%i(§:’1s’are alIaweda
Judge
_