Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2009 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (11) TMI 870 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURTWhether the Commissioner is justified in invoking section 22A(2) of the Act, when such a revisional power is also vested with the Joint Commissioner? Whether the Commissioner was justified in holding that the black pepper purchased by the appellant from the unregistered dealer from outside the State of Karnataka and purchases made within the State of Karnataka?
Held that:- As per section 21 as well as 22A of the Act, revisional powers can be exercised by both the authorities within a period of four years. When limitation is stipulated as four years, it is not for the Commissioner to direct the Joint Commissioner how he has to exercise his revisional power, when such power is vested in him under section 22A of the Act. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that point No. 1 has to be answered against the assessee by holding that both the Joint Commissioner as well as the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes can exercise their powers under different provisions of law. So far as purchase of black pepper is concerned, the order of the Commissioner is mainly based on the note sheet maintained by the assessing officer while passing the order of assessment. Based on such note, the revisional authorities are not expected to reverse the findings of the assessing officer. It is for the assessing officer as well as the revisional authorities to find out whether the black pepper purchased by the assessee from the unregistered dealers from local or inter-State based on the accounts maintained and other documents. Appeal is allowed in part by answering the question of law and remanding the matter to the assessing officer to give his finding in regard to purchase of black pepper worth ₹ 77,35,310 is either from the local unregistered dealer or from the unregistered dealer outside the Karnataka State.
|