Case Law Details
Meenaxi Building Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commercial Tax Officer (Karnataka High Court)
Karnataka High Court held that petitioner failed to prove how notification no. DCOM(I&C)/AC/CR.22/10-11) dated 24.05.2010 is in violation of the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003 or the Constitution of India. Accordingly, notification no. DCOM(I&C)/AC/CR.22/10-11) dated 24.05.2010 issued by authorities to track movement of goods is valid.
Facts- The petitioner is a transporter and dealer of cement at Bangaluru and was transporting cement purchased by one M/s. ACC Limited, Ballari from Andhra Pradesh to Karnataka. As the vehicle carrying the cement did not have the necessary documents as stipulated in notification No.DCOM(I&C)/AC/CR.22/10-11) dated 24.05.2010, notices were issued under Section 15(12) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003. Aggrieved by the same the present writ petition is filed.
The petitioner is challenging the notification bearing No. DCOM(I&C)/AC/CR.22/10-11) dated 24.05.2010 to the writ petition as violative of the provisions of the Act and the Constitution of India. Consequently the petitioner is praying for setting aside the notices issued against the petitioner.
Conclusion- The petitioner in the course of his arguments, is not in a position to show as to how the said provision of the notification no. DCOM(I&C)/AC/CR.22/10-11) dated 24.05.2010 is in violation of the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003 or the Constitution of India. The said details are specified by the authorities in order to track the movement of goods in the manner known to law, which is essential to determine the tax liability under the Karnataka Value Added Tax, 2003.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
