Skip to content


P. Keshava Vithoba Bhandarkar and Brothers Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Mangalore Division, Mangalore and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition Nos. 18480 of 1979, 666, 4126, 4738, 4747, 1541 and 1542 of 1980
Judge
Reported in[1983]53STC240(Kar)
ActsKarnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 8A, 8A(1) and 8A(3A)
AppellantP. Keshava Vithoba Bhandarkar and Brothers
RespondentDeputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Mangalore Division, Mangalore and anr.
Appellant AdvocateB.G. Shivaram, Adv. for K. Srinivasan
Respondent AdvocateM.R. Vanaja, High Court Government Pleader
Excerpt:
.....the effect of the pronouncement of the division bench. 6. these petitions are allowed in part and the impugned notices, in so far as they seek to bring to tax the purchase turnover in old gold and silver articles on the basis that such turnover has ceased to enjoy the benefit of the exemption, are quashed......to revise the assessment orders so as to bring to tax the purchase turnover in old gold and silver articles are challenged. 2. the impugned notices initiating the proceedings for revision proceed on the premise that the exemption in respect of such purchase turnover available under notification no. s.o. 2048 dated 10th september, 1970, issued by the government under section 8-a of the act stood, in view of the pronouncement of a learned single judge of this court in shrishailappa v. commercial tax officer, jamkhandi [1975] 36 stc 223 cancelled whenever there was a modification in the rate of tax and that in this case there has been such a modification resulting in the exemption ceasing to apply. it is to be noted that in k. janardhana acharya v. state of karnataka [1980] 46 stc.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Venkatachaliah, J.

1. The matters arise under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the Act). In these writ petitions, the notices issued by the revisional authority under the 'Act' proposing to revise the assessment orders so as to bring to tax the purchase turnover in old gold and silver articles are challenged.

2. The impugned notices initiating the proceedings for revision proceed on the premise that the exemption in respect of such purchase turnover available under Notification No. S.O. 2048 dated 10th September, 1970, issued by the Government under section 8-A of the Act stood, in view of the pronouncement of a learned single Judge of this Court in Shrishailappa v. Commercial Tax Officer, Jamkhandi [1975] 36 STC 223 cancelled whenever there was a modification in the rate of tax and that in this case there has been such a modification resulting in the exemption ceasing to apply. It is to be noted that in K. Janardhana Acharya v. State of Karnataka [1980] 46 STC 375 a Division Bench of this Court overruled the view of the learned single Judge in Shrishailappa's case [1975] 36 STC 223. Thereafter section 8-A(3A) was introduced into the 'Act' by Karnataka Act No. 7 of 1981, to overcome the effect of the pronouncement of the Division Bench. The said provision in section 8-A(3A) provided that if the rate of taxes payable under the Act in respect of any goods or class of goods gets modified by an amendment to the 'Act', the notification, if any, issued in respect of such goods or class of goods under section 8-A(1)(a) of the 'Act' shall, with effect from the date from which such amendment comes into force, be deemed to be cancelled. The question that arises therefore is whether the notification dated 10th September, 1970, exempting the purchase turnover in old gold and silver articles is a notification under section 8-A(1)(a) attracting section 8-A(3A).

3. It is not necessary to go into the merits of this contention as it is conceded by the revenue that the exempting notification dated 10th September, 1970, under section 8-A is not a notification under section 8-A(1)(a) so as to attract the provisions of section 8-A(3A).

4. Accordingly, as the notification under section 8-A of the 'Act' (exempting the purchase turnover in old gold and silver articles subject to certain conditions set at therein), cannot be held to have been cancelled by the attraction of section 8-A(3A), the impugned notices are without the authority of, and unsupportable in, law.

5. In view of this short ground on which the petitions admit of being disposed of, it is not necessary to go into and pronounce upon other contentions raised in the writ petitions. They are left open.

6. These petitions are allowed in part and the impugned notices, in so far as they seek to bring to tax the purchase turnover in old gold and silver articles on the basis that such turnover has ceased to enjoy the benefit of the exemption, are quashed. No costs.

7. Smt. Vanaja, the learned High Court Government Advocate, is permitted to file her memo of appearance within 3 weeks from today.


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