Skip to content


Nandi Steel Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (Recovery-i), Bangalore and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Appeal Number 2016 of 1982
Judge
Reported in[1984]57STC86(Kar)
ActsKarnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957; Karnataka Taxation and Certain Other Laws (Amendment) Act, 1982; Constitution of India - Article 226
AppellantNandi Steel Works Pvt. Ltd.
RespondentAssistant Commercial Tax Officer (Recovery-i), Bangalore and anr.
Appellant AdvocateK. Srinivasan, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateS. Udayashankar, High Court Government Pleader
Excerpt:
- karnataka land reforms act, 1961.[k.a. no. 10/1962]. section 48a: [h.v.g. ramesh, j] rejection of form no.7 vesting of land in the state under section 44 no notice to purchasers who had purchased the lands in the year 1967 and subsequently order of vesting of land passed by the land tribunal held, the purchasers who had purchased the land in the year 1967 and subsequent to that are entitled to be informed by the land tribunal about the order of rejection of form no. 7 and the order of vesting. hence, the matter requires reconsideration for want of due notice to the petitioners. -- karnataka land revenue act, 1964.[k.a. no. 12/1964]. sections 128 & 129: [h.v.g. ramesh, j] registering of mutations and register of disputed cases held, it is needles to say it is duty bound on the part.....orderchandrakantraj urs, j.1. the petitioner is aggrieved by the assessment order which is at annexdure c made by the first respondent that came to be confirmed by the deputy commissioner of commercial taxes and a copy of that appellate order is at annexure d, the petitioner has not filed the second appeal provided for in the karnataka sales tax act to the appellate tribunal. in this writ petition the challenge made is to the recovery proceeding initiated as seen from annexure b. this cannot be permitted, as long as the assessment order has become conclusive. 2. for the above reason this writ petition is rejected. 3. on appeal, the case came up before the division bench : k. srinivasan, for the appellant. s. udayashankar, high court government pleader, for the respondent no. 1.
Judgment:
ORDER

Chandrakantraj Urs, J.

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the assessment order which is at annexdure C made by the first respondent that came to be confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and a copy of that appellate order is at annexure D, the petitioner has not filed the second appeal provided for in the Karnataka Sales Tax Act to the Appellate Tribunal. In this writ petition the challenge made is to the recovery proceeding initiated as seen from annexure B. This cannot be permitted, as long as the assessment order has become conclusive.

2. For the above reason this writ petition is rejected.

3. On appeal, the case came up before the Division Bench :

K. Srinivasan, for the appellant.

S. Udayashankar, High Court Government Pleader, for the respondent No. 1.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //