GRAS IMPEX PVT. LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the learned counsel, perused the pleadings and examined the order impugned, the core question for decision making is whether the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka), Bangalore, invoking the jurisdiction under Section 59(4) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, for short 'KVAT Act' could invalidate the clarification issued in the petitioner's case, by the authority for Clarification and Advance Rulings, under Section 60, without having invoked the Revisional jurisdiction under Section 64(2) or the remedy of an appeal under Section 66 of the said Act?

(2.) Regard being had to Section 60 relating to clarification and advance rulings in respect of any registered dealer to be deemed to be final and binding on the petitioner and the respondent unless the Commissioner constituting such authority seeks to invalidate the same by way of revision under sub-section (2) of Section 64 or an appeal under Section 66 of the KVAT Act, the clarification of the authority by the order Annexure - 'C' in the case of the petitioner, a registered dealer, is binding on the commissioner.

(3.) Section 59(4) of the Act under Chapter VI provides for issue of instructions to subordinate authorities. Sub-section (4) invests in the Commissioner a jurisdiction, on his own motion or on an application by a registered dealer liable to pay tax under the KVAT Act, if he considers it necessary, or expedient to do so for the purpose of maintaining uniformity in the work of assessment and collection of revenue, clarify the rate of tax payable under the KAVT Act in respect of the goods liable to tax and all officers and employees shall observe and follow such clarifications.