TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to ignore, and circumvent the alternative remedy provided by law. It cannot be allowed to rush to this Court after the limitation period is over, and to plead that the writ jurisdiction should be invoked by this Court. Court is not inclined to invoke its writ jurisdiction - petition dismissed. - Writ Petition Nos. 60-62/2017 (T-EYT) - - - Dated:- 30-1-2017 - Raghvendra S. Chauhan, J. For the Petitioner : Smt. Vani H. Advocate For the Respondents : Sri T. K. Vedamurthy, AGA ORDER The petitioner, M/s VDB Projects Pvt. Ltd., has challenged the Assessment Order, dated 27.08.2013, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax (Audit Recovery) for the assessment year 2010-11. The petitioner has also challenged the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s raw materials, component parts and inputs in the manufacture of intermediate, or finished product. According to the notification, no tax was payable on entry of goods which were used for manufacture of intermediate or finished products. The said notification was subsequently amended by a Notification dated 15.03.2003 and another Notification dated 03.07.2003. 4. By notification dated 15.03.2003, an explanation was inserted, which clearly stated that in case any of the goods specified in serial numbers 1 to 10 are brought into the local area for use or consumption as raw materials, the tax payable on such goods shall be at the rates specified therein. According to the petitioner, even the subsequent Notification dated 03.07.2003, if re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear 2010-11, vide Assessment Order dated 20.01.2015 for the year 2011-12 and 2012-13, the respondent No.1 has demanded a huge tax and interest from the petitioner. 10. Although, the petitioner ought to have filed appeals against the said Assessment Orders, under Section 13(2) of the KTEG Act, within 30 days from the date of receipt of Assessment Orders, it failed to do so. Hence, the present petition before this Court. 11. This Court has asked learned counsel for petitioner a pointed query as to why the alternative remedy provided under the KTEG Act was not pursued by the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner was advised not to pursue the said remedy. Moreover, the remedy cannot be pursued presently as the compet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
