STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. ECE INDUSTRIES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE revision petitions are filed against the common order passed by the Karnataka Appellate tribunal in the appeals filed by the assessee and the cross-appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92 under Section 12a of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act ("the kst Act", for short) and for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97 under Section 12 (3) of the Act and also the levy of penalty for the years 1990-91 and 1991-92 under Section 12-A (1-A) of the Act.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated for the purposes of these revision petitions, the facts are : the respondent is a public limited company. It is engaged in the business of manufacture, supply and installation of lifts and elevators. The respondent-company has branches all over the country. It has its manufacturing unit for lifts and elevators at Ghaziabad, U. P. The respondent-company at Bangalore undertakes designing, manufacture, erection and commissioning of lifts and elevators according to the requirements of individual customer. The registered office at Bangalore procures orders from customers in Karnataka towards supply, erection and commissioning of lifts and elevators, but the manufacturing of these lifts and elevators are undertaken at its factory in Ghaziabad, U. P. The designing and construction of lifts is as per the requirement of each specific customer. Lifts and elevators so manufactured are later stock transferred in parts and received by the regional office at the customers' premises. The final erection and commissioning of lifts and elevators takes place in the premises of the customers in the State of Karnataka.

(3.) THE assessing authority for the assessment years namely, 1990-91 and 1991-92 had completed the assessments originally under Section 17 (6) of the Act by accepting the returns filed by the respondent-company by its order dated July 11, 1992. After receipt of the report from the Intelligence Wing of the Department, wherein it was reported that there existed a large quantity of turnover which was exigible to tax, but which had not been declared in the turnover of the assessee, the assessing authority has re-opened the completed assessments for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92 and has passed reassessment orders under Section 12a of the Act and also has levied penalty under Section 12-A (1-A) of the Act. The assessing authority for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, after rejecting the returns filed by the assessee has completed the best judgment assessments under Section 12 (3) of the Act read with rule 18 (1) of the Rules.