STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. MANOJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RE: STRP No 21 of 2009: This is a revision petition by the revenue under Section 23(1) read with Section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 [for short the Act], directed against the order dated 10-4-2008 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in STA No 2285 of 2004, where under the tribunal had allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee, an appeal filed under Section 22 of the Act, which in turn was directed against the order dated 7-8-2004 passed by the first appellate authority [Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals and Audit), Mangalore, in appeal No KST/AP 6/04-05. The first appeal itself was directed against an order dated 22-4-2004, passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Sales Tax Check-post, Mukka, Mangalore, calling upon the respondent owner of the vehicle-cum-oil tanker bearing registration No KA 19 A-4060 to pay a sum of Rs24,523/- representing the tax liability on 12 kiloliter of superior kerosene oil of the value of 1,63,488, in respect of which the check-post authorities had issued transit pass No 0107642 dated 25-6-2003 and which transit pass had not been surrendered by the person in-charge of the vehicle carrying goods at the stipulated exit point within the permitted time, thereby attracting tax liability in terms of the provisions of Section 28-AA of the Act and a further penalty of Rs 49,046/- as per the order of even date.

(2.) The Commercial Tax Officer. Sales Tax Check-post, Mukka, Mangalore, had assessed the tax and also mulcted thereafter with penalty, for the reason that the transporter had failed to produce the transit pass, within the permitted time and therefore a presumption in terms of sub-section (4) of Section 28-AA of the Act to the effect that the goods in question has been sold within the state by the owner of the vehicle which automatically arises, as per the statutory provision and consequently not only liable to pay tax in terms of sub-section (4) of Section 28-AA of the Act but also liability to pay penalty in terms of sub-section (5) of Section 28-AA of the Act.

(3.) It is because the appellate tribunal in terms of its impugned order dated 10-4-2008 has allowed the appeal filed by the owner of the goods carrier and has set aside the levy of tax and penalty on the respondent, the present revision petition by the revenue.