ETA MELCO ENGG. CO. PVT. LTD., THE ESTATE NO. 201, 2ND FLOOR, 121, DICKENSON ROAD, BANGALORE, 42, REPTD. BY T. SUBRAMANIAN, GENERAL MANAGER Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, (ENF 14), SZ, VTK-2, OFFICE OF THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, 6T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these cases, the Petitioner has called in question the validity of the order at Annexure 'A' dated 24.2.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the 4th Respondent herein conferring jurisdiction on the first Respondent to reassess the Petitioner under Section 39(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('Act' for short) and to impose penalty and demand payment of interest. Consequent upon the power conferred by the 4th Respondent as above, the first Respondent has passed the orders of reassessment and penalty under Section 39(1) and 72(2) of the Act as per Annexures 'B', 'B1', 'B2' 'B3', 'C', 'Cl', 'C2' and 'C3' all dated 13.4.2011.

(2.) SRI . A. Satyanarayana, Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner contends that the power conferred by the 4th Respondent in favour of the first Respondent is invalid and unauthorised. It is argued that the Petitioner has filed correct and complete returns, which have been accepted all along by the Assessing Authority. Therefore, question of reassessment of the Petitioner under Section 39(1) of the Act and levy of penalty under Section 72(2) of the Act does not arise.

(3.) I have carefully considered the arguments of the Learned Counsel made at the Bar.