Kalyan Jewellers Salem (Pvt.) Ltd Vs Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court)
Karnataka High Court held that appellate jurisdiction against the reassessment order u/s. 39(1) of Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 [KVAT Act], cannot be equated with the jurisdiction conferred u/s. 69 of KVAT Act to seek rectification.
Facts- The present petition has been filed by the petitioner u/s. 66(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 questioning correctness of order dated 16.01.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.
Notably, the substantial question involved herein is whether respondent can initiate Suo moto revision u/s. 64 of the KVAT Act, 2003 after the expiry of 4 years since the passing of the order by the First Appellate Authority and whether respondent was justified in invoking powers of revision u/s. 64 of the KVAT Act to set aside the order of First appellate authority, in the absence of satisfying the twin conditions.
Conclusion- Appeal provided against the reassessment order passed under Section 39(1) of KVAT Act and the provision providing for filing rectification application under Section 69 of KVAT Act are two different remedies provided to the appellant/assessee. The appellate jurisdiction against the reassessment order under Section 39(1) of KVAT Act, cannot be equated with the jurisdiction conferred under Section 69 of KVAT Act to seek rectification.
