Sales Tax Appeal Nos. 11 and 12 of 2011. Case: Hindustan Latex Limited, Kanagala, Sankeshwar Vs State of Karnataka. Karnataka Appellate Tribunal
| Case Number | Sales Tax Appeal Nos. 11 and 12 of 2011 |
| Counsel | For the Appellant: Sri P.S. Yadawad, Advocate for Appellant and For the Respondent: Sri B. Vasanth Kumar, State Representative for Respondent |
| Judges | Basavaraj S. Sappannavar, DJM and P. Puttaraju, CTM |
| Issue | Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Sections 63, 2(33), 62 |
| Citation | 2013 (77) KarLJ 301 |
| Judgement Date | August 08, 2013 |
| Court | Karnataka Appellate Tribunal |
Judgment:
P. Puttaraju, CTM
-
These two appeals are filed under Section 63 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 challenging the Endorsement/Order dated 26th October, 2010 issued by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Belgaum (for short, as 'FAA') in appellate orders for the years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. The FAA by endorsement has rejected the plea of the appellant to rectify the mistake by taking into consideration of the Form 'C' declarations as adverted in the application as available on records in Case No. JCCT/APIBG/CST-26 and 27/08-09, dated 10th February, 2010. The FAA has passed the appeal order by allowing appeals which were filed under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, the 'Ace), by directing the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-III), Belgaum (for brevity, the 'AA') to issue revised demand notice for the turnovers liable for tax at 4% and 12.5%.
-
The facts and grounds leading to these two appeals in brief is as under:
(i) The appellant is a Public Limited Company of the Government of India.
(ii) The appellant is a registered under Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and borne on the records VAT Sub-Office (VSO-381), Sankeshwar and engaged in manufacture and sale of Condoms and Oral contraceptives.
(iii) The appellant is registered under KVAT and CST Acts and borne on the records VAT Sub-Office (VSO-381), Sankeshwar and engaged in manufacture and sale of Condoms and Oral contraceptives.
(iv) The appellant has been reassessed under Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act read with Section 39(1) of the KVAT Act on Annual basis separately for the years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007.
(v) The appellant preferred appeals before the FAA furnishing Form 'C' declarations to avail concessional rate.
(vi) The same has been considered and allowed by the FAA. But after the receipt of the appeal order, the appellant filed application for rectification because of arithmetical mistake in not arriving at the correct turnover liable for tax at 4% covered by 'C' Forms. In view of merger, rectification was sought at the level of FAA who has rejected the request of the appellant by issuing 'Endorsement' which is contested in these two appeals.
-
The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the FAA erred in not considering the rectification application wherein specific Form 'c' bearing Number TN/H 259922 issued by M/s. M.R. Technology, Chennai is not considered for...
To continue reading
Request your trial