VASAVI INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. The petitioner is calling in question the order dated November 2, 2009 which is impugned at annexure G to the petition.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the said order would point out that the appellate authority has not taken all aspects into consideration inasmuch as C forms were also furnished. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since in respect of the amount which has been assessed, there is an error apparent and in any case by way of rectification, it could have been corrected. However, merely because the petitioners have filed an application, the authority could not have rejected the appeal.

(3.) The learned Government Advocate would however point out that the petitioners instead of availing of the remedy of rectification, if they were so aggrieved, have filed the appeal as contemplated under section 20(5) of the KST Act. The provision of law is very clear that beyond 180 days, the delay in any event cannot be condoned. Therefore, the authority was justified in dismissing the appeal.