{"id":133217,"date":"2010-02-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010"},"modified":"2015-12-22T22:00:14","modified_gmt":"2015-12-22T16:30:14","slug":"sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.L.Manjunath And Kumar<\/div>\n
I R\nIN Tfiii HIGH COURT OI' KARNA'I'AI'iA. BANGALORE\n\n{)A\"I'1-31) TI---118 'I'H'E\u00a3 15*\" DAY OF FEBRUARY. 20 \nPRESENT ,.], s\nTHE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.L.M.ANJUN13ITIfI .. __f  ;_. A' \n\nAND --  ~ .\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE  _\n\nS.T.A E\\EO.8w\/_2\u00e9'\u00a7O'7_   ; \"\nBETWE{C1\\E A \"\nSn. '1'. Shiva kuma r.\nPWD ConE.1'ac1.0r.\nEc\ufb01gas Sireei.\n\nH0le11arasipur~57321 1.   \"\nHassan District. \"~\n\n(By S11,K.K.Ch:ii':z1.V:fiy21. 'A,\u00a31{ta.t\u20ac\" for RaghL1ramaI1 Associates)\nAND:\n\nThe C0mj11iss1s;1\u00e91' or C ()1T1EH\u20acI'CiE1I Taxes\nV.z1f*:'i}yz1 'I'c:ri K2i1j\\ra_I_;13=va:-1 .\n\n'V \" Ga1I'1rihi';i\u00a31g\u00e9ir,\n\n ' \u00a33a11_gaI--()_:'cz:56OvQ09.\n\n: Respondent\n\n(Smt.Ge::tF1\u00e9;1j'..--1'\\\/\u00a3e:1()11. Govern Ineni Advocate.)\n\n \n\n\n\nas Civil work which is labour oriented. The appellant i.se'Va\"}s0\n\ncarrying on {he business in I--ISD, Petrol diesel l\u00bb:;:b4rir:9;_:1-ifrsll'\n\netc.. as a subsequem. seller. For the assessnrzerltl\";5eavr:_si.9'97\u00e9 \n\n98 appellant had opted for the behel'ilZ\"ef eornp.qsi<tiorrln \n\nrespect of C()r1l'.1'E1Cl work u1'1derta.ke1'14'arld_the jlLrrisdit?tiC:riaEp 9'\n\nAssessing OlTiC\u20ac1~_ namely V     of\nCommercial Taxes [Assesspaen\ufb01'"Pls,_sseii'1.levied"4'5Pxw~3[aX On\nearthen work under Sectlllexlrll  order dated\n26-4-1999 whieh.lig.__ai  Of\ufb01cer\nlevied tax at  labour work\ncf  to Rs. 15,56,671\/~\nrejegxtixaglllthel' :'le2l<r\ufb01e11ipti0n of receipts relasuing to\nlabour." -. LA 9 A V\n\n {ii}-"9'A f"\\\u00a7\u00a7%\u00a71'K'V<*lClH """ "by the order of assessment dated\n\nthee.:vegssessee preferred an appeal before the\n\nJoint' C(mm"1'i_.s'si0ner of Commercial Taxes in appeal\n\n ~.._*N0.KSTZAl'1;94\/\u00a7999~2O0O who by order dated 22-6-2000\n\n';iiEmve'd the appeal and set aside the order of the Assessing\n\n \n\n\n\n6\n\n22m6~2()00) and {he order passed by the Adclitional\n\nCommissioner of Commercial Taxes Zone ll. Ba.;v'i~g\u00a2'1l.ore\n\n(dated 6\u00ab6~2003) are prejudicial io the inieresi.  .\n\nand accordingly called for reply from the appellaii-ijassessee.__4 \n\nin response to the said notice the ei\u00bbppe:ll'anii' lierein"  'C\n\nobjections to the proposed revisionary"proceedings: vby reply'\ndated 6--2\u00ab2007 (Annexure~H) wliitrli came ioconsidered\nby the Commissioner of C_o:ri1m--ereialCu "i"~a1_;;es\u00ab,a11d by his order\n\ndated 1-fl~\u00bb3~2007 1fejeetedAAi:_he_elairn  ihe Cerise;-eVssee--appellant\n\nand restored ilie\u00e9ottdepr .p::assedV"Vb3r"tleieixbepiiiy Commissioner\n\nof ConiiiiercialTgxesg by his order dated 14-3-2007\nrejected the (.:i_aim_oi' ijjlrlebVass'e\u00abssee--appellant and restored the\n\norder Vpassed""b}} the Depiiiy Commissioner of Commerciai\n\n ppvTa"x\u00a7j:g'}I:.Ar3,'\u00a7\u20ac-3\u00a7n1e;%1_i';uffla\ufb01sall dated 29"4~1999. H was h\ufb01fld\n\n Ezhmiein. il"::~;1i,.ori:":e the assessee has opted for composition he\n\n1e.21CVnr1()Vl.i'  "oo=i'_:ar1d accordingly confirmed (he. order of\n\n E  ' '\ufb02y\nAss _ss1ii5j_ Oi  \\.I" {T\n\n\n\n(V) The appellembassessee being aggI'ieved by the said\norder dated 14-32007 passed by the Commissioner of\n\nCommercial Taxes, is assaiiing the same In this appeal:  \n\n3. We have heard Sri.Cha.ii.ar1ya, \n\nappearing for the appeiianbassessee ii\n\nMenon. learned Counsel appearing for, fihei resp'c)v:i'diAen.i,.i\n\nrevenue.\n4. At the time of admissioriivioiiithe apf)eai,":the iolioudng\n\ntwo questions have vfbeen _-.'o1'niu~lai:eCi'..by this Court on\n\n1 l~7~20:{)8 ihrxhe!:ng_a;1Asw'e\u00bbre<;l: . _'\n\n{i] i'=.Wii1ei.her  ':C'oi'4r1iT1issioner of Commercial\n was ."_\u00a7usi.ii'ied in coming to the\n<3,O11c!1,is'io--r1--\u00abthat. when once the contractor\n\n=.VhaVs~--.__submii:ted himself for composition\n withdraw the same subsequently?\n\n. ai\u00e9. Li\n\n as - {ii"}*...: Whether the amendment made to Rule 8-\n\n8(1) of {he K.S.T. Rules is prospective and\n\n\n\nwhether the same was in force on the date\n01' withdrawal of the application by the\n\nappellant'?\n\n5. Sri.Chait.anya for the appellant--assessee "mid\n\ncontend as follows:\n\n{i} The power under Section 22~A(1} of  M\n\nwith the Additional Commissioner Whiehwis in f"ate.;?ia\n\nwith the power available under Section 1) of \n\nTax Act and thus the Additional _C'on1n1issione_r lWas'..ji"i'srtiEied\n\nin his order dated 6-6-3--2QQ3 pern1--itt'ing"~i;lie  to opt\n\nout of tjornpositi.-9Vn.__Vggrovision and allowing the appellant-\nassessee 1'<;,p'pr;_ i'o'r~.asse'ss'nien't tmder Section 5-133.\n\n,{ii) x1helj1,,.1'c1giiieIit' in Karnataka State Construction\n\nl'Co&r};5orati-o'{1 .I,in1it.ed lllll "was passed subsequent to the\n\nlre\\?1sioi1a_l"'~._ordcr_:..of the Additional Commissioner of\n\nCormfne1'(:ia.1liiigviles. Zone 11 dated 66-2003 and as on the\n\n .\u00ab._'said dat1e'i--i.e.. 6w6v2003 Mycon Construction case was\n\n   the field and hence the order of the Commissioner\n\n'""\n\n\n\n"bag:  V'ia3.;g.\n\nin holding that orders of Joint Commissioner {Appeals}\n(dated 22~6~2000) and order of Additional Commissioner\n[dated 8~6~2003) cannot be held to be erroneous on the\n\nbasis of the subsequent judgment.\n\n(iii) When two views are possible the View ta__1{eh' --l)f_V---  _\n\nAdditional Commissioner cannot be said to be_.err.oijeo't;a.s. .\n\n{iv} The decision of Karnatetlia \n\nCorporation Limited Vs. State Vof.4_Kar1"1ai'_aka\n75 did not deal with the specific  of Colrripositioni option.\nIn the decision in Wip1*oi_4I'nfote_eh.  reported in\n\n(2000) 1.20_STC'C'..iVii9V:'<.it'has___beer;. held pure labour charges\nare not ezxfigihle io'rsal'es  as such the levy of sales tax\non seijviees when there is no transfer of property in goods is\nit  "  contended that the Commissioner of\n\nCoin-rnere.ia1_fiiaxes in exercise of his power under Section\n\n.u""\u00ab.__V"2.2wA[2]z iota the Act. is not empowered to review both the\n\n "o"1'ders"} i9\u20ac'I the order of the Joint. Commissioner dated\n\n(200412 ..  gm: 0\n\n\n\n22~6~2000 as well as the order of the Additional\n\nCOi'I1FT1lSSl(Ji"i\u20ac'.F of Commercial Taxes. Zone ll dated 6--6--"?,_O'O3\n\nsince the said provision permits him to disturb Einy..~o:1.e;  A' \n\nat a time.\n\n6. Per contra Smi.Geetha Merion.llle'.9.rried.;'counseldfor \n\nthe revenue, would contend that once the"assesse_e lias'~opted l'\n\nfor composition under Section l"I?g[.6}.ol" the-. 'Act. :i_l1eylllc2inlnot\n\nbe perinitted to opt out pai'ti'C:ull:arll\u00a7".._in the-A revisional\n\njurisdiction. Ii i.s also ;_l'cor1tende:{:Iev:l_ fih\u00e9ii: the Mycon\n\nConst1'uetio\u00b0i a- _ c\ufb01aselll :?':~.'\u00ab1iz:a.s"--re-n.dere'd"' in the background of\ncor1sideri,ng'~1l1e elliV:{llerige"lto'the vires of amendment brought,\nto Rule 8-B"!._ollKarri2_ii.\u00e91ka _S\u00e9_;v1es Ta.x[Amendment) Rules 2001\n\nxvherejuridger tliewvires was challenged and in the said case it\n\nvvas ":3 co'i'ice:-ysion given by the State and as such the\n\n petit_ioners_'therein. and similarly placed persons were allowed\n\nt.o.'opl'i:lloi.1tof:'\u00a7'(iiiI1posit.ion and submits that order passed on\n\n'nconcession cannot be a binding precedent. She further\n\n1;' " ,..\ns. gym\n.\n<\/pre>\n
elaborates her subnlission that in B.V.Subba <\/p>\n
DCCTS ease reported in 125 STC 287 the  .<\/p>\n
was extended by relying upon i\\\/iycjonfs cas’e””andj ,boii,.f1′.ythev <\/p>\n
judgments were rendered by the ie\u00e9imedi s.i::1gIee. Jui;i’ge<\/p>\n
Court and she brought to ofiii”-.noticte’.f;haty t]i;te”‘s.gti.d_yySttbba <\/p>\n
Reddys case came to be set  a E;)\u20acI1tj\u00a7h of this
\nCourt by its   Hpetssed in
\nW.A.No.1740\/.?.OQl anci__   that neither
\nMycon’s nor ‘the—-position of law has<\/p>\n
been iaid   i4’ti1;tyl1\u00a73~’~-v\u00a2;ul:\u00a7’;jnits that in Karnataka<\/p>\n
State CLons_tr1.1Vc%1’ifon..y_Corpof\u00e9ition ease, the Division Bench of
\nthis Cotirth\u00e9ts heid t”hVat_ oneethe assessee exercising option<\/p>\n
for C.’O:iIipC_)SitiO\u00a3T\u00bbQ{V,FEtX would be estopped from going back on<\/p>\n
\u00ab”thyeV’groti’-no tiitat some work or portion of work is not Works<\/p>\n
I also contends that in the ease of<\/p>\n
‘I’.i~I.~3[enk.ettggowda Vs. Commissioner’ of Comrneroijai Taxes<\/p>\n
 -‘\u00ab.___V’-reporteeivni 2006{E:Sl} Kar.L.J.289. the issue relating to levy of<\/p>\n
it  “\u00abf’;3;:y_i_ni.;*espe(:t: oi’ Labour Cont:r:;:ct.s, it has been held by this<\/p>\n
{W<\/p>\n
Court that Once the assessee opts for C0mp0si’L1’0r1 CanV11oj; bf,’<\/p>\n
permitted to opt. out and on these grounds she reqii\u00e9s*;5s_’  _<\/p>\n
Court. {:0 answer the que3si.i0ns of law in I’2′:v011r.~3i7..tf1’e 1’C.VCnu\u20ac ”<\/p>\n
and against the assessee.\n<\/p>\n
7. In support of ih..\u00a7: ‘~.._subriaiss1onS~_ i’;.1\u00e9i(ieV “by<\/p>\n
Sri.Chai1ayna he reiies upon theAC.f91I0Wii1g deCiSior1s:_J3<\/p>\n
1. Malabar 1nd?us,fu”:;1i’ j’ Vs. CIT
\n[;2.Q00g_24;3 11jRgi33.'{sC3-.._V ‘ ” ”<\/p>\n
 C1T5j\/S. QM: .,.;\\\/11:,-m1 .su\u00a7ii{iess Steel [P]<\/p>\n
1  1;%.d;.=; (2d0:3;_V”*2\u00a3?s_3 .j1*rR 2%-\u00a75″‘(sC)<\/p>\n
 Ivasc-.._1’r1r11;i Ltd. (2007) 295 {TR
\n K.a_ma._:h*._Res-{aux-ant vs. ACCT (2007 8<\/p>\n
\\”\/\u20ac-T:i72 mar.)<\/p>\n
.  E$.~_CIT vs. Abdulkarim Stone Contractor
\nV   .,r:’1997} 225 ITR 1032 [Raj].\n<\/p>\n
 ‘  Parikh 3: C0. vs. CIT (1980) me 610
\n‘  [Guj.)<\/p>\n
 7. sum Amiya gala paui vs. C1T[2oo3) 262<\/p>\n
ETR 407 [SC] j<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
8. Mycon Construction Ltd. VS. Sidie of
\nIiarnataka and Another [1998] 111 S'”FC_–.__
\n322 (Kala) T<\/p>\n
9. av. Subba Ready vs. DCCT (2o02:;’~~–:–2′::.’_ _ “if  <\/p>\n
SEC 287 (Kan)<\/p>\n
10. lqbai Ahamed vs.__~I\u00a7)C_C’I’   <\/p>\n
KLJ 390 [Kali]<\/p>\n
8. Per contra Sn1LGeetha  ‘M.er1on’,-..i\u00e9arnegf’}$;\u00a7.di1iV0:31al<\/p>\n
Government Advocate appearing__{ic$i=..1_he_\u00bb res}.) c)nd:\u00a2nt v\ufb01evenue
\nwouid reiy upon the 1’c)EE()v\\2’\u00a2-Y-i1″Vig_de_cisaj1.0nS’:_ ‘  .<\/p>\n
(i) Karnataka S{.e…i”_e’\u00bb VCQ:1stri;.cti'<\u00a7n Corporation<\/p>\n
V"'T'i.–injF'.;'i.eci\u00ab ,:E33 11'ga&1"c3re \\fS';"S"\u00a3\u00e91t.e of Karnataka (2004)<\/p>\n
{ii} '"wr, A.VN;\u00a7. 1'174Q'\/'2..uG'01_ disposed ex' on 10422004
\nV 'V  in VU'i1."3 I1IEl'{v[\u20ac1' of Deputy Commissioner of
\n.  Ci<;1j11r11erc'i'\u00e9{l Taxes and others Vs. B.V.Subba<\/p>\n
 I.__;i '1’\u20acie1* to appretriafe the cromerltions raised by the<\/p>\n
 V1;e9P?53Ct,iv\u00a33—- “advocates. it wouid be nt\u00e9cessary to extract the<\/p>\n
‘<\/p>\n
relevant provisions of KS’? Act as also Rule -8 of Karnataka<\/p>\n
Sales Tax Rules:\n<\/p>\n
Section. 22-A of KST ACT  _
\n[22~A. Revisional powers of
\nCommissioner] and   ” it
\nThe {Additional Conm1issi.on’er]A’ ”
\nown motion calI”:_i'{;r__ anda.\n<\/p>\n
record of {any ordenpassed orprotteeding
\nrecorded] uvrider [Syeetioifi:f2tVO’s.Q_r Sectioirii
\n01] this Act.  that any
\norder.passed.~the1f*einv–.by a\ufb01y  who is<\/p>\n
not  i:;i”1e7 ‘rani-.’:K.,_oif a “(Joint<\/p>\n
”  erroneous in so far as it
\na is .  ‘the interest of the
\nit   necessary, stay the<\/p>\n
operaiion  sttch order for such period as<\/p>\n
L he de’ern,s___ifit and after giving the assessee<\/p>\n
  .:;1An–..Voppori:iinit:y of being heard and after
\n“nia–ki_r1g or causing to be made such
\n“Vii”.;r{uiry as he deems necessary, pass such
\norder thereon as the circumstances of the
\ncase just’ify._ including an order enhancing<\/p>\n
or modifying the assessment, or canceling<\/p>\n
i6<\/p>\n
[1] or sub\u00bb
\nsect.ion {2}. as the Case may be. ii!
\n(21)<\/span><\/p>\n
has not expired:\n<\/p>\n
Act 4 of i992 [1-+92 to 31-3-99)<\/p>\n
power} under subsection<\/p>\n
(b) the matter has been subject’-t_Q  L”<\/p>\n
appeal under S\u20acCtiOI12?.””()Z’~.a 1I’evisi()”n..”ir1V <\/p>\n
the High Court: or}
\n(C)<\/p>\n
more than four years”have1.e*}{p.ired<\/p>\n
after the passing oidrhet\u00bb0rder’sdught i\u00a35–.3o”e”‘<\/p>\n
revised.  V _
\n(4) Noiwithstarrding ain}ftEi.i_i’2.g”contained in
\nL ”  the . {Additi0r1a1<\/p>\n
subsection (3), <\/p>\n
Ce5rn_misAsi0:1’e1’~}:01″ the Commissioner, may<\/p>\n
” pass ‘order’un’d.er sub–seetion {1} or (2),<\/p>\n
 the _f\u00b0’:~:t_1_b~seetior1 [3], before the expiry of a<\/p>\n
\/,  of one year from the date of the<\/p>\n
. n’;-,-“de.r in such appeal}. or revision or before<\/p>\n
the expiiy of a period of four years referred
\n{C}<\/p>\n
whichever is 1ater.]<\/p>\n
subsection<\/p>\n
:;{%>\/” a<\/p>\n
to in clause of that<\/p>\n
the time for appeai against the orderg\ufb02.<\/p>\n
[[5] Every order passed in revision unde1*;'”–
\nsub-se(:t’ior1 {1} shaii. subject to the
\nprovisions of sub~seCt.ion (2) <\/p>\n
section. Seeiions 23. 24 and   <\/p>\n
Fina}.\n<\/p>\n
(6) Every order Passed ’10 i{\u00e9\\I’isiori~_iIf1,C’ierV  <\/p>\n
sub~seCi’.ion {2} .sh-2i_li,  ;i:o”\n<\/p>\n
provisions of SeCiion’sLf23. 24 <\/p>\n
finai]<\/p>\n
{Explanation-I\u00bb   i   . b\u00e9issed or
\nprooeedi_ngs  V_ the\u00abv:.e’pp1’opria\u00a3e<\/p>\n
a1V13:horiiL’y_.refe:rred to Vsuibi\u00e9section [1] or<\/p>\n
V'{2sji\\::>iI1\\}\u20ac\u00a3Vf3S”‘”ah” iss’u”e*’o’n which the High<\/p>\n
: Co.ui*i.f1:isgiVen”‘ii,s’ decision adverse to the<\/p>\n
i  revenue ‘in some  other proceedings and<\/p>\n
 }ap.p\u00a2–a1 “go the Supreme Court against<\/p>\n
Vs:.ichA””‘d.e\u00a7:_ision of the High Court is<\/p>\n
  penvding, the period spent between the<\/p>\n
 L1i\u00e9u~e:f.raI’ the decision of the High Court and<\/p>\n
 date of the decision of the Supreme<\/p>\n
.’Cnouri shall be exciuded in computing the<\/p>\n
period referred to in clause  of sub<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
section [3].\n<\/p>\n
permission shail be in Form 8–AB and shall <\/p>\n
valid for the entire year to which it relates.  ‘<\/p>\n
{tit}’I’he [Assistant Cgmmtssieherii y erf * _<\/p>\n
Commerciai Taxes] or [COH1ri\u00bb1\u20acI’C”iE’1–!A.;Ta}l.Of\ufb01’C\u20acf} <\/p>\n
may cancel such permission. if thehdealezf?’\n<\/p>\n
(a) fails to pay tax i11’t’.:\/my nj0r1th’w:itthin the
\ntime speci\ufb01ed;   .  ”\n<\/p>\n
fh) c:on1,raven.es_”ar,1y’prQvtsion’ef—-the Act or<\/p>\n
:_ ” Rttl e ::rI&1a3de”‘Vth’e’1’e:  den’:
\ngttrii\u00e9ndxfgent Rage s-a’ t~e
\nIfi_n.il.e   Jrules, in sub–ru1e(1}:-<\/p>\n
i. or the  “thirty days”, the words ” one<\/p>\n
httnd.reti and twenty days” shall be substituted:<\/p>\n
  the words “course of the year”. the<\/p>\n
   Words shall be inserted, namely<\/p>\n
. _’f’.a\ufb01d such application once \ufb01led by the dealer
\nelecting to compound the tax shall not be<\/p>\n
permitted to be withdrawn by him”\n<\/p>\n
iii. The proviso shat} be omitted.\n<\/p>\n
10. The Lmdisputed i’act.s leading to the i’e\\Iisec\u00a7vo1’*der<\/p>\n
being passed by the COI’IHI1iSSiOI16l” of Con1merciaI\u00abVTaxesatifei’ V.<\/p>\n
Assessee is an individual P.W.D. contractor.invoived in <\/p>\n
the works Contract and had opted “i”orA_ ‘assesisnient*:by0.”1<\/p>\n
composition method under Sectior1’:’\u00ab.1__’\/’b’t5V}A. of  Act:._ ”<\/p>\n
Assessing Officer in respect Voi7.Vt:’Works “carried the
\nContractor to the tune Q.–f– levied  at the<\/p>\n
rate of 4% which ‘c1I1’1OLil”i4″E’\u20acV’d:”L.’)”- rejecting the<\/p>\n
ciaim fovr’i’ev::ertij;ptiori;”oi”–receipts'”*reiatir1g to Labour. The
\nassessee be.ir1g.2tggrietfed”by.the same filed an appea} before<\/p>\n
the Joint Conin’1is’sio’ne’1′,.oi’—-Commerciai Taxes (Appeals) and<\/p>\n
the }\\4;o1je1t]o.ate uAt1Eit1orityV”i3y order dated 22-6-2000 held that<\/p>\n
0″worksV’eot1t.1’ar;t: r\u20acC\u20aciW[‘)tdCOI1C\u20acrI1iI1g the execution of earthen<\/p>\n
 of Rs.i.65,70,899\/– be reduced from the<\/p>\n
gr’)s’::.__wo’i*i\u00e9s_v.contract receipts and only the rest of the tum<\/p>\n
 over’~be  to tax under Section 17(6) of the Act,<\/p>\n
thereby reducing the tax liability to Rs.8.93.835\/~.y”‘”ron1<\/p>\n
Rs. 15.56671\/– . One curious aspect which reqriiyifoslylltol”hoV<\/p>\n
noEiCr:*d at this juncture is that. the assesses being.._se1\u00a3is.ii\u00e9d.lof<\/p>\n
the same did not challenge the se1r1iey\\Fi’iicl1  obvzi’o\u00e9,is sirirce <\/p>\n
the same being beneficial to it.\n<\/p>\n
11. Be that as it. may. t.h\u00e9’\u00bbAEiditior2al.Coni1:r1issiorier of
\nCommercial ‘I’axes. Zon-“‘e._li. \u00a35\u00e91″i1g;z:il’or\u00e9sA..in exercise of his
\nPowers under Sec’aio1’1 22-Ail] (‘\ufb01ne Aoii;fs_;uo’vi11oiu issued a<\/p>\n
notice dated 2~9e2QQ)2  aippollant assessee to<\/p>\n
show L’.ElfJ1S\u20ac   1.11%?r\u00e9E.i\u00e9i”‘give’l-1 by the First Appellate
\nAiithoriiy bii1:1*c:\u00e9itirigy’la\ufb01vozjiilori of the contract work should<\/p>\n
not be broiiglfii to fax ‘qs”i.i  an ‘error’ warranting revisional<\/p>\n
 EECliQl};.’ byVplac:i11.grelialice on the Case of S.S.Muddam1a Vs.<\/p>\n
  of_vl&”s.rn\u00a7it;–1ka reported in 89 SEC 90 {HC](DB]. E1 is in<\/p>\n
 ii. was contended by the appellzmi. that<\/p>\n
t,l1mi’\u00a7;11   had filed form No.8 and had sought for<\/p>\n
 _’Eh..eVibe11e’i’iE of ctomposiiion. Ehere was statutory duty cast. on<\/p>\n
of the First Appellate Authoiities order l”i)d1’1g the liability t.o<\/p>\n
Rs.8,93,835\/y .\n<\/p>\n
12. The respondent Commissioner in eXer’cis_e’~.o’fghi.s<\/p>\n
power under Sub~Section 2 of Section 22\u00bbA of  .<\/p>\n
both the above said orders narnely,_the order'”oli’_the*.J’oVint. <\/p>\n
Commissioner’ dated 22~6~2000  <\/p>\n
Additional Commissioner dated 6-_6–2tl03llby hisvllorder
\n14-3-2007 holding that the aslsesseey had’  made any
\nrequest before the Assessing  to_’\\zl7i’thdraVxr permission<\/p>\n
granted,to—.hiln’i.tol’G;o1;  leom.;3osit.ion either during the
\nassessrrient  at the time of assessment by<\/p>\n
Assessing l\u00a3\\L\u00a7tll1:)rilt’y_ a’nd”  at the Appellate stage. It was<\/p>\n
 11()tiC\u00ab\u00e9\u00a7d by the “v–.Con1n1issioner of Commercial Tax that<\/p>\n
 Ad’d.itior_;al_ Commisslorier of Commercial Tax, Zone\u00bblI,<\/p>\n
 v\ufb02relied upon the judgment. in Mycon<\/p>\n
Const1’L1et4ior1″l Limited referred to supra and permitted the<\/p>\n
 _las-syesseerto revoke the Composition option. By perusal of the<\/p>\n
T\\.)
\n(J:\n<\/p>\n
judgment. in i\\\/Eycor: Co’r1st’ruct1ion L-iriiited’s Case it i’s:rio”ti.ce<:!<\/p>\n
by us that assessee therein were permitted to  oVu.t_'o1i"thVe'e M<\/p>\n
basis of the concession made by.:th_e._Sta~*__e.  }"1:I.'4thev.,S\u00abaiEi..<\/p>\n
decision. the constitutional xralidity ofhSub?'se'ctiori <\/p>\n
Section 17 was under coris_id'eratioIi" arid it  "this "<\/p>\n
background. the learnect J u.dgeV_oI':V:t.h._is' 'Court in paragraph 13<\/p>\n
of Mycorfs case held as 'i'o3vi\ufb02ows.{  }<\/p>\n
"However._'in__ view} "of '\u00ab.ca_tegoriea1 statement
\nmade b_Vy?_:theit'estVat.e"* rstatemeht. of Viot\ufb01ections stating
\nthat i.his_:.'Cotirt~.. ca"f11:'p,e'rmit the"petitioner opt for<\/p>\n
 5~B: and I have
\nta;1._\u00a7ef1"th'at as the factors to come to the
\nCO1'1'C"3.LtS'if)vI'1VV't1"iEt;LA:'U'!<%"'i\u00bbI'Xit)ugI1\u20acd provision is a way
\n,resi.1.!ts.V a'rbitrai*iriess or violation of the right
\n.15*g1;iai*a1nteedxHtowhe petitioner either under article
\n  145 orv1i1i'de1~ articie i9(1}[g} of the Constitution; it
\n  reserve liberty to the petitioners to<\/p>\n
A  opt. :i\u00a7r}.,.a\u20ac\u00e9gt;_1ai- assessment under section 5-13 of
\n'the'\u00ab:_Ae1. 11otw'ithsta1'1ding the fact that they had<\/p>\n
i *  ooted for COl"I1p0Si1'iOI] under section 17(6) of the<\/p>\n
..\u00ab*\u00abAet. if the petitioners. within 12 weeks from today.<\/p>\n
i,,<\/p>\n
26<\/span><\/p>\n
make a.n appiication to the concerned assessing
\nauthority that they may be assessed as provided<\/p>\n
under section 5-8 oi’ the Act, and further direct”-<\/p>\n
the assessing authorities to proceed to assess<\/p>\n
petitioners and ail others, who are not  ‘7’ V<\/p>\n
Court. as provided under section 5–B_otft_heV _<\/p>\n
This direction is binding on”the'<Sta.te .:atAtCil._it_Vs"\u00abx'<\/p>\n
assessing. revising or ap"pellate~ au.th0_riti&es"'~~_H7A<\/p>\n
wherever an appiication isl\ufb02rnade fseeiging <\/p>\n
assessment under section"5_-13. of the" vahdlltyhey
\nare directed to pass approfir"iate~~..orders*vsi.iitably<\/p>\n
modifying the assessi:f;1ent.s.'Z'_' . "<\/p>\n
Stibsequventlyepi  l5l\u00a7edVdy's case similar issue
\nnameiy zwhle\u00abthe1'- off.-'composition is permissible by<\/p>\n
an assessee""eai'ne_l1or 'consideration and on scrutiny the<\/p>\n
"~,l_earn_e'cl Judge ofxlthis-~~\u00abCourt following the dicta in MyCon's<\/p>\n
 ear'-ed held.the"'issu.e in favour of the assessee and the relevant<\/p>\n
pa'i<agraph l"v'vl\u20ac:)'j_.7..–::II.'1 Suloba Reddy's case reads as follows:<\/p>\n
 *7. The assessee in this case had prayed for
\ncomposition be1.1eiit'.s under section 17(6) of<\/p>\n
the Act. Thereatter. realising that the<\/p>\n
COIi'1pOSi1.i()!} application fiied by him
\nnot be beneficial to him, had thot1gh_i\u00a7f_:'.i"i't' '
\napproach the assessing at1th_ori'ty
\ncomplete the assessmen'tfs'—i.n his
\nthe assessment year 1'A99??9Ei tiridee<\/p>\n
provisions of section_5–B oi' the Aet;;V5._iV_11:my <\/p>\n
opinion. the assessi'itef'"authoritif 'iinV.'.vie"vg
\nthe observations m;;Lde:b*,r_ the learned.A.J1i.ie1ge
\nof this Court" _  {_i'v'Ii\/"eo'1'i.T\ufb02onstruction
\ni iifii  should<\/p>\n
i 1-9981'<\/p>\n
Lin1ited's case
\nhatxruei\ufb01asssefsi  orrie_;1jM;T_Veoiiio1etinz{ the
\n  section  of the Act
\n{1qii1iott't.  iiiiiptigined endo:"semenl..<\/p>\n
l'1*1i'~.j\\?i_Ve*.=trf\u00e9oi' _t'h.e above. the endorsement<\/p>\n
"issue_ci'_assessing authority is<\/p>\n
"'–<:4oriitreiry to the}observations made by this<\/p>\n
Court in"I\\\/Iyeon Construction LimiteCi's Case<\/p>\n
3.3998} i"i"i"STC 322. In that View of the<\/p>\n
V'.'l"}'..'gVi:f'{!ifI'. it is difficult to sustain the<\/p>\n
 :""'iV1_npitzgned enclorsernent. Therefore. the<\/p>\n
. :.?,nE4}:;.i"IAi<-1' reqttires to be set aside by this Court."<\/p>\n
  {emphasis suppiieci by us}<\/p>\n
3: '2 <\/p>\n
"Fhereaf1.erwards the above said Subba Reddys case.'l:wavs<\/p>\n
1.al<en up in appeal by the State in  <\/p>\n
whereunder the coordinate Bench oi""'tl"~:-is'Cot1rt'lloy.'ii'sl order.'<\/p>\n
dated 1012-2004 reversed i,he:"';\n<\/p>\n
B.V.St1bba Reddys case thrill’VJ:P.No”.274i\u00a7Q\u00ab{2GtlO'”dated <\/p>\n
20- 102000 and allowed the a.p.peal_i1’l–ed by “t’i”–1e_SVtate. It is
\nheld by Coordinate Ben(:hlyoi’l’.*,his Subba Reddy’s<\/p>\n
case (paragraph No.8 in:.W’;A_:l’toV.’i.7.4_Ol\/to the following<\/p>\n
effect:\n<\/p>\n
.vr[hevrefg}e{l.;_:in oar _::theL\u00a7o1’der passed by the
\n Jttdge is -liable to be set. aside on
\n:t’hels_hort.lground._:ijhat_.the conclusion reached by
\nhim,_.~u\u00bbjls”‘\u00a2($u\u00a7n;ef_”_;~to the two Division Bench<\/p>\n
1 ‘ ‘d.ecision-sh ElhisV’Court, referred to above. Further.<\/p>\n
 as riightily\ufb02 l’f)’o’inted~out. by learned Additional
\n  Gvo\u00a5*\u00a21’ift”ment Advocate, in the case of Mycon
\n  Court has not laid down the law<\/p>\n
 the View that if once an assessee seeks for
\nassessnlent by Way of composition under Section<\/p>\n
is  .lV?{6] oi’ the Act. it would still be open for him to<\/p>\n
 Opt out of it and seek for assessment under<\/p>\n
 *  1[\u00e91tthe rate of four per ce1’1t.]I<\/p>\n
31<\/span><\/p>\n
14. Section 17 of the KS?’ Act” pro\\IideSr’\u00bbfor<\/p>\n
composition of tax. The reievant provision VVhiC?1’1..~’~\u20ac1JT’i’S~\u20ac’.S'”‘ for” <\/p>\n
consideration in the present appeal is sL1bV__Se-ctiof1″~ 6 of\u00bb _& <\/p>\n
Section 1’7. The same reads as i’o11o\\-\ufb01e. _ V _ _ V
\n“Sec.17(6){i) Karnataka  Ta}:-v_tA.AAct.’V n
\nSection }7{6} {i)’_
\ncontained in Section  t..V_g,eibject. f.OHSVEA,1Ch
\nconditions and in   as<\/p>\n
may be  Ae;SeS:sth’g”At1thority of<\/p>\n
the ar’:e\u00e9tTvj’;?1f1et3:\/2,.V’Vif-.et’~c1VeaIe_rHlgiabie to tax under
\nSe’ct1’on  accf\/’Pt in lieu of the
\namou{1n_Vt  pf by him during the
\n.\u00ab.\u00a7;year und’e’1<._thHis  by Way of composition an
\n on  total consideration for the
\n \u00e9vcohtracts executed by him in that year
\n  :State in respect of works contract<\/p>\n
 spseci\ufb01ed in Column {2} of the Sixth Schedule<\/p>\n
ii) Any dealer may appiy to the<\/p>\n
assessing authority to be  __<\/p>\n
permitted to pay t.he amou_nt_\ufb02._4i_i’-._<\/p>\n
under Ciause (i) and, on beirj1g’so_~  :_. <\/p>\n
permitted, he shat} payV__t:ax.   i<\/p>\n
advance as provided. ‘for _:.u_n*der  in<\/p>\n
Section 12-13  and” all
\nprovisions   ‘S-ecxtion
\nmutatis mutVan_ti’is_ shail. A_app1y:’:\u00a7to<\/p>\n
this sub section]s;’;\n<\/p>\n
iii} The amount  1–i11dei5;elause (ii).<\/p>\n
  ‘ ””su’ovjeCt to such
\n  may be necessary
\n‘  ,.4’:”eorn’p1etion of final<\/p>\n
   No tax shail be payable under<\/p>\n
 tiii.sj~..s”ubi’~~section on the turnovers to amounts<\/p>\n
 ‘paid. fej. ‘sub–c:ontra(:tors as consideration for<\/p>\n
exvexfjtation of works contract’ Whether wholiy<\/p>\n
” riwa\u00e9orvwpartiy subject to production of proof that<\/p>\n
Vsueh sub–eontraetor is a registered dealer<\/p>\n
.. Hie ”  it A<\/p>\n
liable to tax under the Act and that
\nturnover of such amounts is incltidecl
\nmonthly statements or return of ttirnotier, it
\nthe case may be, filedmby <\/p>\n
contractor. ”\n<\/p>\n
15. Ifa dealer is liable tol.t’\u00e9L”2i.Vunde’l” Section  t.o S’<\/p>\n
elect for composition. inlieu olf_ahiiour1t_V of ‘payable by the
\nassessee during the yea”1″=.~ion ‘iihef,t,ol.4\u00e9i’lVt:(:Q\u00bbfisideration for the
\nworks contract e>:ecutec’l”b’y~ y.ejar in the State, in<\/p>\n
respect of woijks5t3o.i1traict’specified irimcolumn No.2 of VI<\/p>\n
St:hedul’e.l”‘iThe’j;.rate}:of wotil’Ci”l:>e 40\/o. Conditions and
\nCiI’CLll’1}S-tai;l{“.\u20acS’ ]_)Vi’e.:\u00e9cribeti’–..girlder the said Section is to be<\/p>\n
found in  of the Ii.-\u00e9rnataka Sales Tax Rules . 1956.<\/p>\n
~ , A Rule ‘ 83B rezids a\u00e9\u00a7’i’ol__lo_wvs:<\/p>\n
  Composition of tax in the case of
\n lAV.l.Ve”2iecuting Works contracts- (1}’I’he
\n elects to compound the tax for any<\/p>\n
y.eeii\u00a7_ tinder sub-section (6) of Section 17. shall
\n *n,_suSl5rz1it. an application in Form 8–AA to the<\/p>\n
 ~ASS(3SSil”lg Authority each year. within [one<\/p>\n
34<\/span><\/p>\n
hundred and twenty days} from the date <\/p>\n
(.'()fI}i”I1\u20ac’I}C\u20ac’i’I1EZ11l of such year. or of the bUSlI16’SSl’~’l’<\/p>\n
if he has crommencecl the business diigmg. <\/p>\n
Course of the yeariand such application. .<\/p>\n
filed by the dealer electing tofeonrtpeurlid l\u00a3l’l\u20acV:ltE?~.)_\u00a7._l”‘V’l<\/p>\n
shall not be permitted to be   2 ”   A<\/p>\n
{X X x X x X}<\/p>\n
(2){l]The assessing Wpautuhority  lhavilifig
\njurisdictiori, after Jjlsmzch _’\\?erilieati=ol’11_as may” be
\nnecessary permit saeh l’de.aler,_lsuj’bjeet to the
\nconcfitions speeifie:d”‘m~ .;\u00e9i1b~’rt1’lte  to in lieu
\nof the 21I\u00a7_lOtt\u00a7}.1_’ of  \u00a7pa”yable_lb}.k “l1-Em during the
\nyear,   .o’i’~.jjwhie_h’p. such’ permission is
\ng;jaI1t_edA,l’a_r: ..arnotm_t””.by .w_’ay of Composition as<\/p>\n
prlo-vietedlm  L5] of Section 17.\n<\/p>\n
(ii’)S,uCh7’permission for composition shail<\/p>\n
J!’l’be\u00a7_gra.r1ted\\3vith–iri’ thirty days from the date of<\/p>\n
 _V re_eeipt..’vTo{._the application during the year for<\/p>\n
   composition is applied for. The<\/p>\n
l’ lllpermis’-s_1:)l1 shall be in Form 8-AB and shall be<\/p>\n
it \\-ialld for the entire year to which it relates.<\/p>\n
Com1’1’1<~rrcial 'I'a_xes] or [Commercial Tax Oi'\u00a7TiMc:er.;."i.'l;. <\/p>\n
DJ
\nLI}<\/p>\n
(1'ii]The [Assistant Commissioner of .. <\/p>\n
may Caiicel such permission, if the dealei'.-fl"<\/p>\n
{a} fails to pay tax in art}? rtiorith :\\J'\\i"iLlf1i],lV'l.l'1'CV <\/p>\n
time specified; or<\/p>\n
{b} contravenes any'-vproyisioh voi''the'*_Ae't–ao'r''' '<\/p>\n
the Rule made thereunder]<\/p>\n
Amendment to Rate' 8–By  is it<\/p>\n
in rule 8~B.of the:.saiti:rt1les;\u00bb_irt.sv1tti;i:\u20ac1};e(1):-<\/p>\n
For the ._.wortw’er1ty” shall be substituted:<\/p>\n
it ._Afte_rV ‘\u00abthe “course of the year”, the<\/p>\n
 l.__4f’C)ll.Vo\\2V\\}’i:_1g  shall be inserted. namely<\/p>\n
 iii. *<\/p>\n
“a1’1-dyilsuleh V’appliCat;ion once filed by the dealer
\nleleet1rig”‘”‘i:o’V compound the tax shall not be<\/p>\n
‘pei’m_it,ted to be withdrawn by him”<\/p>\n
g’<\/p>\n
 proviso shall be omitted.\n<\/p>\n
36<\/span><\/p>\n
16. The words “and such application once \ufb01led by<\/p>\n
the dealer electing to compound the tax shall no’t’*.be<\/p>\n
permitted to be withdrawn by him” came to be  <\/p>\n
the Karnataka Sales Tax (amendment) Ru1es.””~_2:O{I1_”.~.iixiiltl\ufb01.<\/p>\n
effect from 8-6-200i. It. is contended;  ‘Chaiij.zalri\u00a7\/_a.Vv”then”.<\/p>\n
learned Counsel for the appelianiwassessee, their abovev send <\/p>\n
words came to be added to SU.\u00a7;”Rul\u20ac {i}, width
\neffect from 8~6~200l a.nd,.– as sueih’*dn”assessee\u00abiwas prevented
\nfrom withdrawing the c\u00a2’\u00a3ri’p_:;s:1t’,:_gf;’:;:a\u00a31n\u00a71=A.\u00a7p\u00a2ed with effect<\/p>\n
only from the_’s:-V1__id :dat’e’,f p’eir?Ltiie_1’ii\u00e9;ri}jxlithe period of<\/p>\n
assessntieni to _31~3~1998. The said words
\nadded io\ufb01sub Rule’vV[A:_i.~},_:oii__l{L1’1e 8~B not being in existence<\/p>\n
during theEa:sVsevssrner1’ir._Vperiod in question i.e.. 1~4-1987 to<\/p>\n
 31~3e\u00a7i9iV98 canno{..1::>e applied to the facts and circumstances<\/p>\n
‘o:’.:;h\u00e9 czalse :a_n’d.z1<:eordi13gly submits that the reasoning given<\/p>\n
lay of the,Con;:Vi:..i,ssi()11er of Commercial Tax in his Revisional<\/p>\n
ordeefdafged'i3l_<1.513~2OO7. passed in exercise of power under<\/p>\n
fVSecti.o1?.. 22~}X(2} of the KS'? Act. is erroneous and liable to be<\/p>\n
set aside. The undisputed facts on this issue in the<\/p>\n
iiistant case are: the assessee had opted by way of4e.]:e'c-tien<\/p>\n
to get the eomposition done under Section l7{61 _<\/p>\n
and had obtained an assessment order_-on….i2944fl999_" <\/p>\n
(Annexure B) which resulted in \ufb01tirig <\/p>\n
Joint Commissioner of Comnie_rCia1V"7{'aX (App'ea}s)
\ncame to be aliowed by order 22-'8–'2Gt:)O and the
\nassessee having ac:cepted"~V.\u00a7he _shariiei"i:r.i .eii"ect wodldiiviresuit in<\/p>\n
an inevitable conclusion that assessee'dVid_'_'..not have any<\/p>\n
grievance in, ;so~._f'=;1r =as,g eortipos-i_t–ior1__f'method adopted<\/p>\n
partieuiarly .hiatfirig_V"11cot.\u00ab..ei5'erosed the said order of Joint
\nCOrI1rI1iSS'i'(}.i_1'\u20ac'I',Oi';  the dealer has accepted the<\/p>\n
order ipasseditinder Seetioh 20 of the Act. dated: 22~e~2000.<\/p>\n
 v\u20ac'he_n themadditionai Commissioner proposed to<\/p>\n
 revision.Vifjroeeedings under Section 22–A{ 1) of the<\/p>\n
Act '.,\u00a7t1O .~l]1t_)t&?;1AVV by issue of notice dated: 2–9\u00ab2002, the<\/p>\n
 ~'\u00ab4___V'~assesseeV__iAh its repiy dated: 24-5-2005 sought for withdrawal<\/p>\n
"–E'ro.r_n t:on1posi't',ioz.i method and sought for being assessed<\/p>\n
under Section 5–B of Act. There is no separVat.e"<.Vor"<\/p>\n
independent application made by the as'sess_ee '<\/p>\n
withdrawing from composition method… it is seen" i'ro;m Sciause-._V<\/p>\n
(ii) oi’ Sub Section 6 of Section l.’7.:”:.tl1e_”dealer Will” <\/p>\n
apply to the Assessing Authority–.V.i’or p’errniti.ingtVo’vpa_y–‘ithe
\namount under clause [1] and _o_n’-.’oei.ng so ‘–permitted, the
\nassessee is required tovpa\ufb01’ _th’e  i’n.Sjadv’o..nce as provided<\/p>\n
under Section l2,.–_B of _E~1’iF:._l:’\\C’t’- aisid\ufb01avllv\u00e9l”t:h’e: provisions of<\/p>\n
Section 1213  the”Act\ufb01haitellibeeltir.rr;ade'”applicab_1e to Sub
\nSection (6) of i3_ee_tion  Vlifiwflittanciis and the said
\nadvance tax _;5afivSd~Vwo:u.ldvneeessaiily be paid subject to such<\/p>\n
adjustrnent, has it S’–rna.y”‘*\u00ab.__ai’l’se on completion of final<\/p>\n
assessrneni. The provision of Section l2~B reads as follows:<\/p>\n
1233 l5aj}fIient of tax in advance~{{l}
\n;t.:o’~.such mles as may be prescribed.
\n“T._ev\u00e9r\u00a7\u00a5’_’aea;’e’\u00a3 shall send every month [X X X X } a
\nsta.__te’1ri,eSni containing such particulars as may be
\np’res\u00e9:ribed including the taxable turnover<\/p>\n
it l”v.during the preceding month and shall pay in<\/p>\n
advance the full amount of {tax payable by him<\/p>\n
[under this Act within twenty days after the 2<\/p>\n
ciose oi’ the preceding month to which  <\/p>\n
rekates on the basis of the turnover p21I’t.i.C:”t:1’1aI’_S7VV””.:”‘ <\/p>\n
shown in the stateme’nt]] andmthe arr’Io’u–ntf*t.so*v.o ‘<\/p>\n
payable shat} for the purposes ‘[2;   x__<\/p>\n
Section 13 be deemed to bea’~anH_amoLintA. due ” <\/p>\n
under this Act from Loutah. dealer.’}<\/p>\n
1′?! 1
\n{Provided than’<\/p>\n
(i) in the case ofa’i’deaier_.\u00a2iX7hfetre’payment
\nby way o1’4:;\u00a7or1_1poeitVioVI’1′ (1) of<\/p>\n
Sect,i0n_Vi1_7 go” _ac.eept.e_dV. theAt.prouvisi’ons of sub<\/p>\n
section 1 [AV Ushadtlo not dapply: and<\/p>\n
‘=,(ii} in Vi’–he”‘r\u00a7dase””‘of’dealer being a small scale<\/p>\n
A.iE1dLlS{]’:y regist.e’red’. with the Director 01′<\/p>\n
[:5$’h1;C111St;_I’ies  Commerce, Government. of<\/p>\n
_V \u00a3\u00a7arnataka_, such dealer shall send such a<\/p>\n
 \u00ab;Astv;ate1_nen’:.o\u00e9h accordance with st,tb–section(1) but<\/p>\n
 in advance the fuli amount of tax<\/p>\n
2 payable for every quarter within twenty days<\/p>\n
 at ,  after the close of that quarter:}<\/p>\n
.1′ ts; ‘ rule.\n<\/p>\n
. \/\\”‘
\nit A .\n<\/p>\n
vz<\/p>\n
40<\/span><\/p>\n
(iii) in the ease of a deaier whose <\/p>\n
turnover in any year is 1101. more than seven 3  ‘<\/p>\n
fifty thousand rupees shall submit stafe_eVri1.eIit:\u00a7SL’*<\/p>\n
for each moriih in aec0:jdahee.wi1h_v. _s’ub– ‘A<\/p>\n
S\u20ac3(.’li0I1{1] once in a quarter arid p_ay’ii111adVar1Ce  <\/p>\n
the full amount of tax payable ibr_ every –.qi;’x’;j1’I7t\u00a7I’ <\/p>\n
within twenty days after theyyVe2\u00bb0se ol”‘{h_ai aquarier<\/p>\n
to which such tax ire-1ates,E”” -.\n<\/p>\n
Provided 1″urt11eIr:Ih’a1:b =i11e.._dfuA1fi.i.Vainount of
\ntax payahi4e::by_tl1e_’  the year
\nas rediieed the   idaxwalready paid
\nunder  withiri thirty
\n the:f1::i’i*0ae.ye’f tiiedyeardio which such tax<\/p>\n
 1Pro’\\ridedi.A’ai:_s”C\u00ab–._ihadt where the tax payable<\/p>\n
for au:’1y_V Cguariier  a small “scale industrial<\/p>\n
“‘3’\u00ab:.urider1aki1aig\u00abianot paid within thirty days after<\/p>\n
thieVA..e1’6’se of the quarter to which such tax<\/p>\n
fs.ii.el1 undertaking shaii be iiabie to pay<\/p>\n
 Ea); .ihei’e:ai”t’e1′ as provided under this sub–seeti0I1<\/p>\n
2 (.:’}<i'C,IL1.dxiI1g ihe first proviso]<\/p>\n
Act 5 of 2000 (From 1.4.2000}<\/p>\n
{[2} If default is committed in the payment.<\/p>\n
of tax for any month or quarter as the case  5 . i<\/p>\n
be. beyond ten days. whether or not. a stat'e.r_nent\u00ab..<\/p>\n
as required under sub~seot'.ion\u00bbA{~l)_yis l.'i1edV;'u if"<\/p>\n
the arnottnt. of tax paid is lessrtlian   it<\/p>\n
of tax payable for any month oi=ycl1'uart.er,ais.the<\/p>\n
case may be, the dealer'defaulting'..paj,:nientgVo"l'''' '<\/p>\n
tax or making short pay_r11Vle:i'tt_  tax' 'shvallui-in
\naddition to the  interest"oale'u1ated at the
\nrate of two per cent.    date of
\nsuch default', or  to date of
\npayment of  .tax{:'or_T V up. t V ' 'date specified
\nfor pa5'_n1e:_nt;.v_ tinder Section 12,
\n1 l' ['{[3}}: liiiljfioihs1;44eh__:s't.aten1ent is submitted by<\/p>\n
a dealyerl ttnder'.lsubh1's.eoti0n [1] before the date<\/p>\n
jrpreserihed or if the statement submitted by him<\/p>\n
 to""t*–he'l assessing authority to be<\/p>\n
 ._ineo\u00abrreet'vo_r incomplete, the assessing authority<\/p>\n
  the dealer provisionally for that<\/p>\n
A  V 1noVn.1_}:1't,he best of his judgment. recording the<\/p>\n
reasons for such assessment. and proceed to<\/p>\n
V " 4_ dernand and Collect the tax on the basis of such<\/p>\n
aassessnient: [[r\/W rule 17(2)}<\/p>\n
Provided that before taking action under _<\/p>\n
this subsection the dealer shall be given <\/p>\n
reasonable opportunity of being heard]<\/p>\n
[Exp1anation~For the purpose _ .. Of ' <\/p>\n
Section "Quarter" means the'Npe'ri.od".s'of:.three:' A<\/p>\n
months e1'1diI1g on 3151- clay  'h315'~_day' of  <\/p>\n
August. 30"' day of Nox\ufb01ember a11_d'28'*' {or <\/p>\n
29" day] of February.}<\/p>\n
[3~A] When:_4_'''mak.i:ngV_ : assessment oxtder
\nsubsection (3). the :sAsses:'s\u00a7'V1'1.g._A:jt:.horit.y may
\nalso direet_'t'he deahlerto  ad.-;\ufb01tto1'1 to tax<\/p>\n
21vssess'ede;' \u00bb a   <\/p>\n
hh  ta} riot  one and a 1'1a,1ft}:fI1\u20acS but
\n Vhot_VV1Vr:ss*v_th'a}1 one half of the amount of
\n_ V tax._g_I__L"1\u00abe. on turnover that was not
\n  V, dise1osed by the dealer in his<\/p>\n
V h = 5:t:;aten1e1'1t.: or
\n' 'V~V't:(j}'31.';1ot exceecEi11g one and haif times the
\nJ tax assessed in the case of faiiure to<\/p>\n
submit a sta\u00e9tement]<\/p>\n
{{4} {fat the end of the year it is found "
\nthe amount of tax paid in advance  '
\ndealer for any month or quarter n1f_,l:oi=. .
\nwhole year in the agg1'e,glat,Ve"wa's"..fes.s
\nthe tax Payable for tl1at.:"1\u00ab(f1C5'\\l3_Atet*1"lV   <\/p>\n
or the tax for the s_2\\;hole"y_ear as.'Vl'in;a1ly <\/p>\n
assessed. as the clasedlmay  "b3*V-lnaoire
\nthan fifteen,– 'per  th-\u00bbe_ assessing
\nauth.ority may 'direct  to pay, in
\naddition to  petiavlty\ufb01\/:hi"Ch shall
\nnot..be.#less than one 'halfjo.[  tax so paid
\n__in  X X x X} the
\na-.r_r_1<'jul1:*;:_tp  the  so paid fall<\/p>\n
  payahlve for the month or<\/p>\n
"duarter:"o.rl for __whole year as the ease<\/p>\n
 mzay be!  A '<\/p>\n
vl"Provided,t_ha1r no penalty under this sub\u00bb
\n sdseetion shall be imposed unless the dealer<\/p>\n
  has had a reasonable opportunity<\/p>\n
'()'f't&'_'.,Vl::::)V\\\/'1I1g Cause against such impos1t1on;]<\/p>\n
 _A'i{Provided further that no penalty shall be<\/p>\n
levied under this subsection after a period<\/p>\n
44<\/span><\/p>\n
of eight years from the close of the year  <\/p>\n
V\u00bb<\/p>\n
which any tax paid in short relates]<\/p>\n
17. Under Section 128 t.here…is__a  duty,’ <\/p>\n
cast on every dealer to declare the “taxabl..e’ turnover <\/p>\n
the preceding month and t.he’l_dea.1er”i’s.. lrer1_t1ireld
\nadvance the full amount. of taxdoagxgabie  unjder this
\nAct within 21 days after  “month to
\nwhich such tax re_lat.es    on the basis
\nof the tttrnovef: A:iVn’:’l.t’nett:statement filed by<\/p>\n
the assessele,  relex*antc’i_’Rt:l-e apfilicable in, so far as<\/p>\n
payment of 5i;.1–:1 ad3\\.{ance”~is concerned is Rule 17. The said<\/p>\n
Rule reads   __
\n“‘–f_'[1’Z.[Pay’ine–n of tax, in advance.<\/p>\n
itxicimbuurseme\ufb01t  of excess tax paid on
\n:l’:i11;_;!i1stzfial ii1p’~u–ts,etc~\u00a7{(1} The statement under\n<\/p>\n
  (l) of Section 12-8 shall be {in Form
\n  “ariti:ir;x.”t’l1e case of an industrial unit in }”*’orr11 3
\nA  along: a statement in the form of Annexure<\/p>\n
t.ol’E’:_orr:13] and t.he return underisub-section {3}<\/p>\n
V ”  ofVVVSection 25-8] shall be in Form 3~B and shall<\/p>\n
Vxk} M\/M.\n<\/p>\n
i E<\/p>\n
be sent in duplicate to the Assessing At1.tl10ri_i\u00bby. <\/p>\n
[or the Registering Authority. as the case n1;;y”:3:~,..__i’ 5 ~<\/p>\n
. so as to reach it withinltwenty days] arid the.<\/p>\n
close of the month to which such4staE.en’1e’ht;0rV”<\/p>\n
1-etum relates. Such staternentgor re? p7rr17shall”-be”if–..__ <\/p>\n
accompanied by a receipt i’r0rri\u00ab.Aa”..Govejrri.ment<\/p>\n
Treasury. a acrossed p0s_fLla~l._ 01’derV.__ a-,_ci*Qs”s.eld’ l<\/p>\n
cheque or a Crossed (Zl61T1t’–_’;t’f’1VVVC’l\u00bb._Cl1′.'<)._ f'L ir.1.'i'ayQ_urJ-53f
\nthe Assessing  :\u00abtj'_i3eA'*,Regist.Aering
\nAuthority. as the case=i.liI1ay~lbe,}__.ahdfei'1'eashable
\nat a post gf"i"ice\/bahlksituated'  place of
\nlocatioribf thee" lpffice  authority!<\/p>\n
or the.  lo:r"'the Registering<\/p>\n
Atiivthcrityjfls   maybe.} and encashable
\natha post tsa_ril: 's1_tuated in the place of
\nlocal  the  oii\u00e9fthe Assessing Auth0rity[or<\/p>\n
:ti1eLI{egiVst-ei'ingl' Authcrity. as the case may be .]<\/p>\n
  xix} 't'hel"ull arnount of tax payable by<\/p>\n
 _him'0nl._thve__basis of his actual taxable turnover<\/p>\n
V"K.,,.\\\u00b0l'L1Vl}"iV.IA41"5\/ifl,l'l4bmIE"l0I1l'.l'1 to which the statement. or<\/p>\n
 ret u~r~n_ i'rjei21t.es.]<\/p>\n
 [Provided that the statement. to be<\/p>\n
V " '"~.4 L'-'3L1l5I}'1i1.'i(?C?l for the month of April 2001 shall be<\/p>\n
48<\/span><\/p>\n
direc:t.ed to pass appropriate orders suitable
\niiiodifying the assessments…@. We there1’o1’e. __<\/p>\n
request your good authority to canoe} thedd<\/p>\n
composition benefit sought by us and to ass.e_ssVd’x.K. <\/p>\n
u\/s. 5~B of the Act and thus render jL1st’;ie’e
\nus. We have fiied herewith purchase sta’t1eine{nt:s;”\u00bb: ‘
\nExpenditure incurred detai1s;;”RA  ‘proves   it
\nthe works Contract undertaiten “no it
\ntransfer or property is irL4roi<.:ed ette-..Vier_ehat)ii:r1g <\/p>\n
you to finalise the assessrnent.' _<\/p>\n
18. Thus. the assessVee_Ain_ qgevstiorz  Fully aware as<\/p>\n
to the nature of tra.r1saeti,o*n~ar:d Vbei:1g’e’0_ns'(;i.ous of the same<\/p>\n
had e1eL:ted_ ifoxbe .governed- by. alternate method of taxation
\nnameiy eo.1_n;:osit.iVon;-. ‘Was no compulsion on the<\/p>\n
assessee to opt for inethvod  taxation as provided under Sub<\/p>\n
S\ufb01\ufb01eetiion  o’i7.Seet,ionmt;7. It was voluntary C1’10iC\u20ac and it was<\/p>\n
“t~.ht\u00bb.;_;m  iLi”1Vti’–~_va:SS\u20acSS6\u20ac on its own Voiitioh. Thus, the<\/p>\n
atssessee Vb\ufb01ifigtltkt\u00e9lre oi’ the fact that it had iess than 5% of<\/p>\n
  hworks eQr_it:rac:t im-‘oiving transfer of property would not have<\/p>\n
“\u00ab,\/}\u00a3;V<)_se'\u00a3A_: for composition tinder Sub Section (6) of Section 17<\/p>\n
50<\/span><\/p>\n
the Contract. and the tax thereon for <\/p>\n
purpose of payment of tax as  ‘V’ <\/p>\n
judgment of the Supreme Court .\n<\/p>\n
chosen to hold in our Vjilexvl’agaiiiisif ‘t.’.tV1ev'”‘<\/p>\n
assessee. The Appellate  has._r1g.htly<\/p>\n
in our View held th’atv.”‘the assesseev.vha_’v’ing<\/p>\n
Voluntarily, and with   of
\nthe features ofiftihe of
\ntaxation. opted to    cannot
\nbe heard  question’ ‘sul:\u00a7seVq.uer1t’ly” the levy of
\nta);    .   Revisional
\nAut.horjtyl_lll;~after’ iggoiuaog  option under
\n notieing the iegal error<\/p>\n
eo’rnfn_ittedll  . the  Assessing Authority, has<\/p>\n
rightly’ ehos’e_nl’to” review the assessment order<\/p>\n
_;jor1i.i:he ground of prejudicial to the revenue of<\/p>\n
  State. The order of the Revisional<\/p>\n
” fully backed by Section 17(6) of<\/p>\n
.””lthel;i’;%j:t’  also by the ruling of the Supreme<\/p>\n
 Coti.rt’.”””l’he Appellate Tribunal, on the facts of<\/p>\n
 ..  this Case is perfectly justified in confirming<\/p>\n
v _ “lithe revisional order”.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
19. One another aspect which requires to  <\/p>\n
by us is with regard to applieabil_it::y~..e.   the<\/p>\n
antendment\/added words with  \u00bbHfrorn”._8~:6w–2_O’O_<\/p>\n
Rule making power is a delegated Legi_slation. ltgpannlot ‘oxfer *<\/p>\n
ride the statutory provision naniely.Section..:1″?Et3}  ‘act.
\nSub Clause (2} of Sub VSe.ction.’rt{l5}”.otlj  l7’ postulates
\nthat assessee after elect.ir1g  method
\nwould be pern}it.ted_-.byauthority to pay the
\namount urider’\ufb02at:-se_V__{.l  erily on being granted the
\npermission”  lldeaieif would pay the tax in<\/p>\n
advanct\u00e9fas pr()videdAAe4t1ndenr__’Section 12-13 of the Act. In effect<\/p>\n
it would  that oitcebernlitted under the Act of election<\/p>\n
 by vth\ufb01e assesseetl”thee___assessee cannot retrace the steps and<\/p>\n
 ‘&1\u00a7lfi’}it -t0″,Ci\u00a3.)_ “t1__11do what has been done. The same is<\/p>\n
li:’n:;l)erniVisslib]_elftihdei’ the Act itself, which is the only<\/p>\n
conclusi’or1.”which can be drawn by reading the words in sub<\/p>\n
 ._:c’l::1Iu..se {2} of Section {6) of Section 17 of the Act and no other<\/p>\n
U”!
\n2.0<\/p>\n
the Rules. Thouggh Sri. Chaitanya Hegdelhe learned <\/p>\n
for the Peliiioner would contend that Rule 1’1Ei\\’iIT;g:”CO}’%lV\u20ac”..:l’1’1lis-, ‘<\/p>\n
effect on 8~6\u00bb2001.. is to be interpreted’ asi5fo’sy\ufb01ie::{i’~xexiii’-_ <\/p>\n
nature by pressing into service ihe”‘:de\u20ac:’i:sio:n of {he <\/p>\n
Apex Court. in Hitendra   Q  s\ufb02a\ufb01tate-‘E of
\nMaharasht-ya reported in AIR  that
\nlaw relailng E0 righi ol’V\u00a3:e.ili0_1jusu’los1’antiVe in nature
\ncan only be prospectiveondii. e;;n1ioi”.\u00ab’heVIioeiieospeciive and
\naccordingly  added Words in
\nSub Rule (1)::  jhsvsdio  be substantive and
\nnot   .Losg\u00a7ree with the same since
\nthe Acid’ iiself  $30-Orrecl proposition namely<\/p>\n
p\u20acI’l’I1i:{:’:’svi()_Al’1 being gr\u00e9iritied  ihe Assessing Officer when so<\/p>\n
delecztjed  they assessee ii. cannoi be said thai. the assessee<\/p>\n
  ‘Veinop_Lion=.i,.o_}.withdraw from such election. The Act. does<\/p>\n
11of._.provi.de”2_1n option to the assessee io withdraw from<\/p>\n
*.eon1posii.ioi1 scheme. The amended rule only clarifies the<\/p>\n
 [l] 82 (ii) of sub~seotion [6] of section 17 which has<\/p>\n
54<\/span><\/p>\n
to be held procedural in nature and thus it. woi,ild_’b_e<\/p>\n
applicable to the period anterior to amendment alsof’ ‘  d<\/p>\n
20. It is well settled that a dis-i.i’nc’i:i.r)r1 fl121s.t”of\u00a5g;e drn.af.;ie7.,<\/p>\n
by the Courts lvhile interpreting pro\ufb01isions’ of taxing’ s.ta’i_ti_t\u00a2]–.<\/p>\n
between charging provisions _impose__ the
\nand machinery provisions’. xxrhipc-h-dduphrovide niac’i1i.ne:f3; for the
\nquantification of the tax collection of tax
\nso imposed. V .\\N\\E1.i_\\l(3   are construed
\nstrictly,   ddgednderally subject to a
\ni’i_s_?:UI{)lI\u00a3.~}”-L?Ovf1_i%.l.i’ttC:l:lE\u00a7_\u00a71.  P’lor:’.bie\u00a7 Supreme Court: in the
\n(vase    Company Limited Vs.<\/p>\n
commerciht :e*a:\u00a7”‘o_f}E”;:ei\u00a7;_”_.’eKota and others AIR 1981 so<\/p>\n
. _ 1 33 :{.h’as~ held has-..fopl_low:s:<\/p>\n
 _V “‘Fdl’1e.Va1rgi.11r1ent pressed be-I-‘ore us on behalf oi’ the
\n.is\u00bbt.hat since Section 7 of the Act does not
\nexpressly: say that a registered dealer who has not<\/p>\n
it filed  return or a person who has claimed that
\nhis ‘turnover or any part thereof is not taxable and<\/p>\n
ffghas not paid tax due in respect of such disputed<\/p>\n
turnover should also pay interest on the tax <\/p>\n
is Eegitimat.e1y due to the Government.  9 V<\/p>\n
by him. no interest can be ctaimed Llnder<\/p>\n
of the Act in such cases. SeCtj1’o\u00a5i 1*   z\u00a7sC:t’W_}1.ieh:t.v<\/p>\n
deals with the submission  1:et.i;1rns’._i’s  <\/p>\n
Charging section but inachinety” sectt:ion,.:’_v1ti
\nsettled law that a dist:ine’tion. has to_V_be.”‘made”
\nCourt while iiiterpreting ‘At,-he…joroy*isions\u00ab’of-a .12-axing
\nstatute between eft–atgingp2.royisions’which impose
\nthe charge to tax and”  which
\nprovide the~:tn’a.ehiinery’ -the’_q_tian’:.itieation of t:he
\ntax and   of the tax so
\nimposed.  ‘];5roy\u00a7isions are construed
\n~ are not generally
\nsti’bje’c4t. to  The courts are<\/p>\n
expected toV”coasi~:rLi”e the machinery sections in<\/p>\n
gsueh a heat1i’1er that  charge to tax is not defeated.<\/p>\n
 above 1itiIe****oi’ construction of a taxing statute<\/p>\n
 __has’\u00ab.be.env _adopted by this Court: in India United<\/p>\n
 EC\\Ar’i’i’1t’S’~._yvI’;i\u20acn1″_’vV.Commissioner of Excess profits Tax.
\n \u00a33omb’ay.’C{1955; 1 SCR 810: [AIR 1955 so 79) in<\/p>\n
wI’ti’ehvSectio11 15 of the Exctess Profits Tax Act came<\/p>\n
C ”  tttffor COI1Sid\u20acI’::1Ii.iO1″1. The Court observed in that.<\/p>\n
tase thus {at P82):\n<\/p>\n
56<\/span><\/p>\n
‘That section is. it should be en1phasise–d’;.__’_i’  , A’<\/p>\n
not a cha1*gii”1g section. but a r11aei’?.i_’r1e.ry._ ‘M<\/p>\n
section. And a rI1ElChiI1\u20acl’\u00bb’y~ section sh*o.L:;1dV” ‘<\/p>\n
be so construed as to :ef\ufb01Ei3tteE>1tieA.’ <\/p>\n
charging section.’ <\/p>\n
21. It is no doubt true thatKs~t1wb RVu1e”(‘i–}   8–B of
\nthe Rules came to be vi”whei”e\u00ab.L1nder the words
\n” and such app1icationAVoV_rii<:eV  \ufb01i\u00e9ealer electing
\nto compound"    "not*:.'"be….fSermitted to be
\nwithdrawn:py.;_i::xi;?*"—ca{h:\u00e9'j;a.\u00a3\u00a7 at iihserted with effect from
\n8~6~2G7O1 t',h_otigi1 "i1j1__ existence as on the date of the
\na.ssessmer_1_t'oV1"der._"29–4~1999, it was very much<\/p>\n
prese-11–t as oh t.he'e11ate'V'oI'hpplieation made by the assessee<\/p>\n
ii'"seeitii\ufb01g\u00bb–f'"i,oVVi'xyithdr\u00e9i'iX}'\u00ab\u00abI'rom composition method and for<\/p>\n
 under Section 5-8 of the Act by its<\/p>\n
apgtiheatioriih 24~5~2003 and 21130 as on the date of<\/p>\n
 isstiinggz' notice under Section 224(1) dated 2-9-2002 by<\/p>\n
"\u00ab_"_:,?r1e 4'A(:idit'.io1'1e1i Commissioner of Commercial tax. Even<\/p>\n
oilierwise ii is we}! mcrogiiiseci rule 01' iI1LE.'1'p1'\u20ac1dI.iOI1
\naI11\u20ac'I1(h'1'1\u20acI'1I wfiicrh is by way of a criarifieatiori;"tvo_uid:'he"
\nuseful aid in construing the existing earlier e_ver1"
\nthough such ameiidmeiit is not
\nA subsequent legislation on t'V.he_.4_sar1ie'–. \u00e9uhjeet  ..
\ninto by the Court in 0rdei*i\u00bb::to see"   hgiroper
\ncoristructiori to be ptivtiup oii::VAdeii'V1_ vtrherevveither it
\nis silent or \u00a31\u00a311bViguOtiS.W in the
\nearlier 1egis};i"tioiiL:V1"thei=i  iegislation would<\/p>\n
guide the bropdeij i.iit:erpre'i:aAtiC-\ufb01twhich is to be put upon the<\/p>\n
earlier.\n<\/p>\n
22. 31-1, View of 1~h\u20acK,P’1b()V\u20ac proposition of law laid down<\/p>\n
 uiollowing the pririoipies ehunciated by_the<\/p>\n
‘ H'(‘)’1′”~1.’1\u00a7)i'<?,_VSli}3i.I'\u00e9'i1i\u20ac Court as discussed hereinabove. we are of<\/p>\n
{he'veoiisidveire\u00e9lvopinion that Rule 8\u00bb {BN1} of the Rules which<\/p>\n
has come.' into effect from 8–6\u00bb2001 is aiso appiicabie to the<\/p>\n
xperiod anterior to the same. since the said addition is<\/p>\n
cEari["iCa1():y in I1d1,L1I'\u20ac. ACC01"ding}y.. Question <\/p>\n
answered againsi the assessee and in favour of t_1j\u20ac=: Ft'3_\\jV'\u00e93'1'T.'1",1'\u20ac._: "'-, '<\/p>\n
23. Accordingly the foliowing  ”\n<\/p>\n
(1) The appeal filed ~-\/the xassrvssss-axe ‘H1;1ve\u00a5’eby
\ndismissed. .   n u ‘& V’<\/p>\n
[ii] The SLibS1.a1’1″L%\u00a3{}’;   forrnuiated
\n1″1\u20ac\u00a7!’\u20ac’i”Af1; VL:i}1bo\\:%_’e _.s,.\u00a7;3insi the assesses:
\n”\n<\/p>\n
[iii] ” No g1?d\u00e9:jr_;1s ,:6–s_:o”sg,s.<\/p>\n
S&f~<\/p>\n
E”?\n<\/p>\n
.\n<\/p>\n
S&gw<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010 Author: K.L.Manjunath And Kumar I R IN Tfiii HIGH COURT OI’ KARNA’I’AI’iA. BANGALORE {)A”I’1-31) TI—118 ‘I’H’E\u00a3 15*” DAY OF FEBRUARY. 20 PRESENT ,.], s THE I-ION’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.L.M.ANJUN13ITIfI .. __f ;_. A’ AND — ~ . THE HON’BLE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-133217","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 15 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 15 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-22T16:30:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"41 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-22T16:30:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":7018,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 15 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-22T16:30:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 15 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 15 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-22T16:30:14+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"41 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-22T16:30:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010"},"wordCount":7018,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010","name":"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 15 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-22T16:30:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-t-shivakumar-vs-the-commissioner-of-commercial-on-15-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri T Shivakumar vs The Commissioner Of Commercial … on 15 February, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133217","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=133217"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133217\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133217"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}