MOOKAMBIKA TRADERS Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri.Abbigeri Kalleshappa, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and Smt.Vidyavati, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent -State. Perused the case papers.

(2.) AN inspection was conducted by respondent authorities on 24.09.2007 by visiting business premises of petitioner in exercise of power vested under subsection (1) of Section 52 of Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as KVAT ACT for short) and during the course of inspection test purchase of fireworks was made for Rs. 270/ - for which the assessee had not issued the tax invoice as required under section 29 of the KVAT Act and as such assessee agreed and admitted the said offence and compounded the offence departmentally by paying under section 76 of the KVAT Act. It was also found that nine numbers of loose slips which were kept at the shop counter in respect of which the tax invoice had not been raised as and when sales were effected, enforcement authority had detected the suppressed turnover of Rs. 11,693/ - and taxed same at 12.5% which was made known to the assessee and it came to be admitted and tax liability was discharged. Further assessee has claimed input tax in VAT returns for the month of September, 2007. Assessee is said to have failed to produce purchase bills against purchases made. On these grounds respondent proposed to initiate proceedings and as such initiated proceedings and notice came to be issued on 08.02.2013 vide Annexure -A under section 52(1) of the KVAT Act. Thereafter, on 28.01.2014 one more notice was issued calling upon the assessee to produce the books of accounts and other documents. These notices have been received by the assessee and objections dated 24.02.2014 came to be filed vide Annexure -D forwarding the same to the respondent authority by Registered Post Acknowledgement Due. Assessing Authority has passed an order on 02.03.2014, affirming the proposition notice by concluding that assessee has not appeared and produced the books of accounts for audit though called for and based on the available records from the VAT soft has passed the assessment order by raising a net tax demand of Rs.25,141/ - and pursuant to the same, notice of demand has been issued in 02.03.2014 (erroneously typed as 02.03.2013) and challenging the same petitioner is before this Court, contending inter alia that notice issued in Form No.75 for initiation of proceeding under Section 52 is a valid notice for assessment as specified under Section 38(5) and it has got spent itself; and (2) concealed turn over ascertained under Section 52(1)(i) of the Act which escaped to self assessment having been determined cannot be made use for purposes of proceedings under Section 39(1) of the Act and reiterating the grounds urged in the statement of objections, it is contended that assessment order and demand notice raised thereunder be quashed or annulled. It is also contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the availability of alternate plea is no ground or bar for this Court to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction.

(3.) SMT . K.Vidyavati, learned AGA appearing on behalf of respondents would contend that petitioner has an alternate remedy of an appeal under Section 62 of the Act and without exhausting the available, alternate and efficacious remedy, petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and as such, she prays for dismissal of the writ petition.