{"id":143206,"date":"2009-02-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009"},"modified":"2015-05-27T15:32:47","modified_gmt":"2015-05-27T10:02:47","slug":"b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Deepak Verma V.Jagannathan<\/div>\n
 \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDated the 10% day of February 2009\n:PRESENT:  ..\nTHE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE : DEEPAK ~ V.\nAND ._   _\n\n14.0'?\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE,.:,.Y.JA(3AhI?$iz$TH;A\u00a7\u00a7V [  \n\nSALES TAX APPE;,ALo.No_}..1;2f'.j\"_'2oos. '   J. J T\nBETWEEN: ' \" '  1\n\nB.N.PrasaunaKumar,\n\nPWD Contractor,   _  \nGarden House, Garde1i;--Road,, .  \"  \nTumkur, represented by;_'its'  _ .V  -.\nProprietor, Sri A_B.N.   \nAged a.bout5'?.yea1'S;. _,    '  '\nS\/oS1'iD.(_f3i_1V\\Ia;'3j't_x11\u00a71i.a}i..   \n\n. . Appellant\n\n I  (  Advocate. )\n\nA N D: \n\n '~  _  ..A.\u00a71ditioaa}'x?emmissioner of\n\n. W _Com\ufb011ereia1 Taxes, Karnataka, Zone---II,\n _  _  FiooI',a.Vanijya Therige Karyalaya,\n .   Banga1ore--56O 009.\n\n2.  Joirnt' Commissioner of Commercial\n\" Taxes (Appeals),\n< 4_ Bangalore Division, Ahhaya Complex,\n Seshadripura, Bangalore.\n\n.     Deputy Commissioner of\n\nCommencial Taxes {Assts.),\nCommercial Taxes Building, Tumkur.\n\n. . Respondents<\/pre>\n
{ By Ms. Geetha Menon, Govt, Advocate. )<\/p>\n
rd<\/p>\n
2<\/span>
\nSales Tax Appeal filed under Section 24(1) of the<\/p>\n
Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 against the order dated
\n15.3.2006 passed in No. SMR\/KS1’\/BD\/CR-I3\/2005-06
\nby the Additional Commissioner of OoII1111eI’cia]V.’~I’.a.xes,<\/p>\n
Zone-II, Gandhillagara, Bangalore, setting aside–._:’tl1e<\/p>\n
order dated 12.2.2005 passed in No. KST\/liili’\/4’_-?\u00a3?.[.{3+\u20ac\u00a7\u00a7’ <\/p>\n
05 of Joint Commissioner of  Ta:-ie’s.. V’  <\/p>\n
(Appeal ), Bangalore, and   -: <\/p>\n
6.12.2004 under Section 5-A(Z\u00a7}{iii’}A_A_iof  2<\/p>\n
1957.\n<\/p>\n
This appeal “L’~-fore hearing  day,
\nDeepak Verma, J,  :foilowii11g’:<\/p>\n
.lg_e\u00a2\ufb02ooMENT<\/p>\n
 appeared for the appellant<\/p>\n
 , ‘_ aridi.  Menon appeared for the respondents.<\/p>\n
  appeal under Section 24(1) of the<\/p>\n
 Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to<\/p>\n
  ,asL”tlie\u00bb–;-iiet’) agaizist the order dated 15.3.2006 passed by<\/p>\n
A’  Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Zonenll,<\/p>\n
ii  ~~-‘Bangalore, under the powers of S110 motu mvision<\/p>\n
exerciseci by him under Section 22–A(\/1–)3)f the Act.<\/p>\n
3. Notice was issued to the appe11ant–assessee<\/p>\n
pmposing to take up the matter in suo mou;”1’e\\?ision<\/p>\n
against the appeilate order dated 10.2.20(_}5:—   <\/p>\n
the Joint Commissioner of Commereis’_l ”  the  <\/p>\n
ground that the same was ”\n<\/p>\n
the revenue. The revisio1is1.:ve:authoi’ity  a” ‘ L’<\/p>\n
question to  answered by_.it,’  <\/p>\n
“(1) Does  jelly
\nand ss:i\u00a3i’je;j\u00a71voI:%\u00a2es 1 a’  process
\n  of a product
\n  t=1se’–ii1:g1edie;its used?”<\/p>\n
4. Wliiiew   ..–the matter, the revisional<\/p>\n
authority%”‘sef.’  order passed by the appellate<\/p>\n
 V.  _   ‘restored the order of the assessing<\/p>\n
   6. 12.2004. Again’ st the said order, this<\/p>\n
  preferred.\n<\/p>\n
” ~  ‘fits appeal has been admitted on the fol1ow1ng’<\/p>\n
sulastantial question of law:<\/p>\n
“Whether the appellant is entitled to
\npurchase superior kerosene oil at<\/p>\n
concessional rate of tax under Section 5-A of<\/p>\n
G<\/p>\n
laying roads, manufactured bitumen mixture __1.1si11g<\/p>\n
bitumen, chemicals, jelly, etc. The first <\/p>\n
authority, after appreciating the process of <\/p>\n
involving proper mixing of all itra’ ‘V:  <\/p>\n
of bitumen mixture to work site  laying <\/p>\n
held that SKO acts as  “ti__1e’  of ‘ it<\/p>\n
bitumen mixture  wast-11% for..1a3tiiigv~of.t:oads. As
\nbitumen mixture vvaas’  works
\ncontract of   ‘V  A Po Violation of
\nsection      <\/p>\n
8.  .  of Commercial Taxes,
\nexercising’, the  on him under Section<\/p>\n
22–.if\\(1}~ of tlie  issued notice for taking up the said<\/p>\n
\u00bb :\u00a3&\u00bbatter ingsno motu revision. The first respondent i.e.,<\/p>\n
 ‘ti’1.e.i’revisionalsvauthority, proceeded on the assumption<\/p>\n
 Z ‘teas being used by the appellant, in heating<\/p>\n
 \u00bb itbe, containing the asphalt mix. Thus, from the<\/p>\n
uV’.i1nf>ug:t1ed order, it appears that there was some doubt<\/p>\n
“with regard to the use of SKO by the appellant.<\/p>\n
However, the appellate order passed by the Joint<\/p>\n
0\/<\/p>\n
Commissioner, makes evetything crystal clear,  hats<\/p>\n
held as under:\n<\/p>\n
“4) The bitumen mixture] aspiiei-t   i
\nmamlfaetured by using
\nbitumen, chemicals,
\ntechnical speci\ufb01eatieiisfer 21’a_\\’rVi1:g ef
\nand this bitumen  is <\/p>\n
at one place    cf
\nmade is awa1’de\u00a2i,_”    bitumen
\nmixture’   _  ‘V  by<\/p>\n
lorries;-.an\u00a7ii’iti1ereaf\u00a3eVr, the  asphaited.<\/p>\n
  process involves
\n__and proper mixing of the
\n   specialized technical<\/p>\n
A . _speei\ufb01e:atioi1si”v_  for this purpose of<\/p>\n
”  i:iaeufaetu.re__.eupe\ufb01or kerosene oii is used.<\/p>\n
_   superior keresene oil acts as a
\n‘   melting the bitumen to speci\ufb01ed
\n and thereafter when the bitumen<\/p>\n
~~ assumes a semi liquid form, the other<\/p>\n
it ‘  ingredients axe mixed while the process is in<\/p>\n
i heating by using superier kerosene oil, and<\/p>\n
thereafter, the bitumen mixture emerges.<\/p>\n
6) In the course of such manufacture, the
\nsuperior kerosene oil acts as a<\/p>\n
eensumable’\/input, and thereby the<\/p>\n
Ci<\/p>\n
provisions of sec. 5-A apply and the
\nappellant is therefore, eligible to
\nsuch an input and thus the px’ovisi<J;n.s"  <\/p>\n
sec. 5-A are not contravened.<\/p>\n
7) That the mgedicg\ufb01r
\nmanufacture of such bitmrie\ufb01
\nconstitutes an and “merefcre,”‘~..;’the
\nsuperior kerosene  “1-“:.:;\u00ab1_n ..  be i’
\nagainst Form-3′?}”f\u00ab–  <\/p>\n
\n9. The reascziing     authority\nappears     was not used by\nthe     fact, it was used in\n which was used fer laying on\n\n<\/pre>\n
the road,”  as its  a tarred road.<\/p>\n
   ccmflsel for the appellant placed reliance<\/p>\n
 L’ =3 —Bench judgment of this court reported in<\/p>\n
{some  (I(a.rn), in the case of Hccbeeb Proteins &<\/p>\n
 Fats  Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,<\/p>\n
5  wherein it has been held as under:<\/p>\n
“25. The word ‘consume’ contemplates the
\ncomplete exhaustion of the purchased goods.<\/p>\n
Alternatively, the conversion (gs commodity<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
into a diifsrsnt soinmerciai commodity by<\/p>\n
subjecting it to some processing is<\/p>\n
consumption of the former commodity. The<\/p>\n
‘consumption’ in the true economic  <\/p>\n
does not mean only use of goods it <\/p>\n
production of consumer goods. .. it<\/p>\n
utilisation of consumer goodsiibyo. consutiiszfs,’  ”<\/p>\n
It also means ‘used 1.113’:  * <\/p>\n
goods purchased  bei’oor1sui:vgod1,:”‘\u00a2.he<\/p>\n
consumption should 2 tho”  of
\nmanufacture,   the
\nmanufacture of Viotlisg  There are
\nseveral  ‘Wfor   ‘whether a<\/p>\n
 is oonsaiznod  th\u00e9iimanufactum<\/p>\n
iof gstzofa\ufb02y prevalsnt test is<\/p>\n
Whs\ufb02xsr  faroducod is rgarded in<\/p>\n
J the t”1*s\u00a71e,.}f:–y ms who deal in it, as distinct
\nit   iqensty  the commodity involved in<\/p>\n
.its_  and where there is no<\/p>\n
  difference in idemity between the<\/p>\n
 commodity and the processed<\/p>\n
V *~ article, it is not correct to say that one
\nAt ‘T  commodity has been consumed in the
\nA’ manufacture of another. Although it has<\/p>\n
undergone a (logos of processing, processed
\ncommodity must be regarded as still<\/p>\n
retaining its original identity.<\/p>\n
0;’<\/p>\n
’10<\/p>\n
26. Manufacture implies a change but
\nevery change is not a manufacture;<\/p>\n
Something more is necessary. There  ~   K
\nbe a transformation as a rwuit .9?   A<\/p>\n
process undertaken on  product’ = = _
\nnew and different article   :_ T <\/p>\n
name or character must eixierge. The  <\/p>\n
test for determining  ta  <\/p>\n
has taken place is whethver-.._vt11e.’eo1_I’1m0dity
\nwhich is    of
\nmanufacture    as
\nthe      in<\/p>\n
the trade  av  _  commodity.\n<\/p>\n
Th\ufb01 ” — \u00ab  betsire~c:1- “‘\u00a7”DrocessiI18” and<\/p>\n
 now well understood<\/p>\n
 weit  “Processing” means<\/p>\n
_ subj’ecting ‘v._aI__oonimodity to a process or<\/p>\n
  as to develop it or make it fit for
\n_ ieorltet. With each process, the original\n<\/p>\n
–   undergoes a change. But it is<\/p>\n
or1ly”\u00a7–.Vw:hen the change takes the oommodity<\/p>\n
 x to a point where it can be no longer regarded
\n the orignal commodity but is recognised<\/p>\n
in the trade as a new and distinct
\ncommodity that a manufacture can be said<\/p>\n
to take place. Where the commodity retains
\na. continuing substantial identity through a<\/p>\n
Cl?\n<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
preeessing stage, it cannot be said that there <\/p>\n
has been a manufacture.”\n<\/p>\n
11. Reliance has aise been placed on a  A <\/p>\n
the Supreme Court reported in (200735   ‘ <\/p>\n
the case of Commercial    ”\n<\/p>\n
Rcyhstfusm Taxchem Ltd,    it”?<\/p>\n
has been held as und\u00e9-;::;’<\/p>\n
“33. Thg. ~.   ” diesel
\nas   Afdwr’  of the
\n arid fabric. The
\nxiiiewix;  aassessee is a fuel and
\ni13.ub1’ic.=i1it.’jas’e:1c\ufb011:ied’under section 2(34) of<\/p>\n
 ‘V had the occasion to consider as to<\/p>\n
‘ jvhat constitute manufacture. The same has<\/p>\n
%   (1999)114 src 337 in the case of Union<\/p>\n
of  J.G.G’1ass Industries Ltd. Paragraphs\u00bb 16<\/p>\n
V’ ‘5_”  17 thereof, which are relevant, are reproduced<\/p>\n
 ;be1ew:\n<\/p>\n
“16. On an analysis of the aforesaid rulings,
\na twofoid test emerges for deciding whether<\/p>\n
the process is that of “manufacture”. First,<\/p>\n
‘%<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
whether by the said process a di\ufb01’erent_<\/p>\n
commercial commodity comes into existenee’._ 7_V<\/p>\n
or whether the identity of the
\ncommodity ceases to exist;\n<\/p>\n
whether the commodity wtliohewas  ” _
\nexistence will serve no  jbizt ‘for:  _ <\/p>\n
said process. In other wofds;’-._whethe1f’ the  <\/p>\n
commodity already in   no <\/p>\n
commercial use, but fozf…the_  girooessf In
\nthe present   .A   are
\nthemsekves  and can
\nbe sold. 2nd’_-    process of
\niogosfon  bottles, the<\/p>\n
 does not<\/p>\n
 to be bottles. It<\/p>\n
cannot but for the process of<\/p>\n
printing, Vthe  Willi serve no purpose or<\/p>\n
..  are of ii0~._\u20ac;0I\ufb02l1’i6I’Cial use.<\/p>\n
  _   counsel for the Revenue has
\n‘ stzbenuoijsly contended that the printing on<\/p>\n
the. :’bottles will make them a di\ufb01erent<\/p>\n
” .oommodity known as printed bottles.<\/p>\n
According to him such printed bottles
\ncannot be of any general commercial use but<\/p>\n
they will be useful only for the persons on
\nwhose behalf and for whose bene\ufb01t such
\nprinting has been done. Therefore,
\naecordixag to him the process of printing on<\/p>\n
\u00ae<\/p>\n
13.<\/p>\n
the I~ii5She ‘3oort of\u00ab  in the case of Namputhms\u00b0 ‘<\/p>\n
 ‘Quoted the Apex Court’s observation in Pia<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
The court referred to various earlier.
\ndecisions dealing with the exp1eseio;1L ‘e._V
\n“manufacture”. We are unable to  ‘e V’
\nas to how the ruling helps the Rever\ufb01ie.\n<\/p>\n
the present case. We     _ \nout that the prfmtzing on    A'\n\nbring into existence' ,3    \"\n\ncommodity which is  and  \nits character,'    \n<\/pre>\n
original  . E-‘IeIf\u00a7ee.,u   unable to
\naccept the eontentiofn of in this
\ncase ”  involves a<\/p>\n
pmdess..o\u00a3   ‘<\/p>\n
  be made to a decision of<\/p>\n
f e(e1j994j9’2 eeexo, wherein a Full Bench of the High Court<\/p>\n
 \u00ab._I~*,ieio;1;;;.__   with the expression “manufacttmh g<\/p>\n
 L ‘ease 1(19so)46 STC 63] thus:<\/p>\n
“With each pmcess suffered, the original
\ncommodity experiences a change. But it is
\nonly when the change,
\nchanges, take the commodity to the point<\/p>\n
where commercially it: can no longer be<\/p>\n
“T\u00ae<\/p>\n
or a series of<\/p>\n
e vs.  State of Kemza, reported in<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
regarded as the original commodity, but
\ninstead is recogxised as a new and
\narticle that a manufacture can be same  he .
\ntake place ……. .. Although it has    A<\/p>\n
a degree of processing, it 31:11.15;   dd  <\/p>\n
as still retaining its orig’na:=1:.’   ‘~  <\/p>\n
In the very same decision,   L’<\/p>\n
had this to say at   .\n<\/p>\n
“14. In the   of cases
\n x$*itj1 the  iidentity” test,
\ncangit be’   “its original form<\/p>\n
(see   v’of”~fheV’FirSt..St\u00a7:hedu1e) and chilli
\nVdpowderd  n f: .e    ‘  __ different commercial
\n  opinion, not. When<\/p>\n
. . .. powder, they do not, in<\/p>\n
V’  ~vviev\u00a7;ci1~’aa”ige in “substantial identity and
\n or “essential nature”. They may<\/p>\n
A ‘   their natural form or used after<\/p>\n
‘   into powder. The mere
\n.. ohange into the powdered form, in our view,
\ndoes not change the “essential nature” of the<\/p>\n
commodity, as stated in Tungabhadra
\nIndustries’ ease (1960)11 STC 82′?’ or the<\/p>\n
substantial identity, as stated in Pic Foods’
\nease (1980)46 STC 63 and Steriing Foods’
\nease (1986)63 STC 239 decided by the<\/p>\n
\u00ae<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
Supreme Court. There is only a change in
\nthe form and no change in the
\nidentity.\u00bb 3  <\/p>\n
14. A perusal of the aforesaid jud_gmei1tsv’  ” u <\/p>\n
that in the ultimate process, <\/p>\n
come out of the said  or <\/p>\n
which should be diifeieut   which
\nhave been used for   in the case on
\nhand, the  $810, cannot be
\nused   undergo certain
\n31 mixture or asphalt.\n<\/p>\n
That  asphait which ultimately is<\/p>\n
 uforwx  road can be made only by<\/p>\n
 V’  _   and that process of mixing the<\/p>\n
    make the mixture usable. Thus, there<\/p>\n
 in the end result of such nihdng.<\/p>\n
  ” 15,.’ iii} the light of the aforesaid discussion, We are of<\/p>\n
 opinion that the order passed by revisional authority<\/p>\n
V  dated 15.3.2006 cannot be sustained in law. Same is<\/p>\n
hereby set aside. Instead, the order passed by the Joint<\/p>\n
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), dated<\/p>\n
(D<\/p>\n
17<\/span>
\n10.2.2005 is hereby restored. The effect of restoration
\nthereof, results in allowing this appeal. The question,
\ntherefore is answered in favour of the <\/p>\n
against the Revenue.\n<\/p>\n
  L Sdi\u00e9.\n<\/p>\n
4% Iudge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009 Author: Deepak Verma V.Jagannathan IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated the 10% day of February 2009 :PRESENT: .. THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE : DEEPAK ~ V. AND ._ _ 14.0′? THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE,.:,.Y.JA(3AhI?$iz$TH;A\u00a7\u00a7V [ SALES […]<\/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-143206","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nB N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of ... on 10 February, 2009 - 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\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of ... on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-27T10:02:47+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-27T10:02:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1796,\"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\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\",\"name\":\"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of ... on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-27T10:02:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of ... on 10 February, 2009 - 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\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of ... on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-27T10:02:47+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-27T10:02:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009"},"wordCount":1796,"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\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009","name":"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of ... on 10 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-27T10:02:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-n-prasanna-kumar-vs-additional-commissioner-of-on-10-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"B N Prasanna Kumar vs Additional Commissioner Of … on 10 February, 2009"}]},{"@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\/143206","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=143206"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143206\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143206"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143206"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143206"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}