Skip to content


Jaya Frame Works Vs. the Karnataka Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSTRP No. 67 of 1975
Judge
Reported in[1982]50STC24(Kar)
AppellantJaya Frame Works
RespondentThe Karnataka Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Excerpt:
- section 17(c); [v. jagannathan, j] offence under sections 13(h)(e) r/w section 13(2)- persons authorised to investigate held, investigation conducted by police officer below the rank of inspector of police is valid in as much as there is general authorisation by state government permitting said officer to conduct investigation. -- code of criminal procedure, 1973 [c.a. no. 2/1974]. section 156: investigation investigation conducted by same police officer who lodged fir is not barred by law. -- karnataka lokayukta act, 1984. [k.a. no. 4/1985]. section 9: [v. jagnnathan, j] investigation of offence under corruption act held, police wing of lokayukta acts independently of lokayukta or upalokayukta. .....and taxed as such by the commercial tax officer are really glassware or whether they are merely glass sheet. the commercial tax officer did not collect any evidence before coming to the conclusion that the goods in question were glassware and not glass sheet. in a similar case, i.e., dongare and company v. commissioner of commercial taxes in karnataka, bangalore (sta no. 1 of 1974 decided on 9th march, 1978), this court has remanded the case to the commercial tax officer to decide the said question after recording the evidence. following the said decision, we set aside the assessment order in so far as the turnover relating to glassware is concerned and remand the case to the commercial tax officer to decide the question whether the goods constituted glassware or glass sheet after.....
Judgment:

Venkataramiah, J.

1. The question for consideration in this revision petition is whether the goods which are treated as glassware and taxed as such by the Commercial Tax Officer are really glassware or whether they are merely glass sheet. The Commercial Tax Officer did not collect any evidence before coming to the conclusion that the goods in question were glassware and not glass sheet. In a similar case, i.e., Dongare and Company v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Karnataka, Bangalore (STA No. 1 of 1974 decided on 9th March, 1978), this Court has remanded the case to the Commercial Tax Officer to decide the said question after recording the evidence. Following the said decision, we set aside the assessment order in so far as the turnover relating to glassware is concerned and remand the case to the Commercial Tax Officer to decide the question whether the goods constituted glassware or glass sheet after recording the necessary evidence. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of.


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