PORLU PACKERS Vs. CHAIRMAN CLARIFICATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petitioner who is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, who took the chance of applying to the Commissioner under Section 4 of the Act, inviting his advance ruling on the scope of exercise of tax liability in respect of the product known as plastic woven sacks. It appears, the Commissioner--second respondent did give his ruling which was not to the liking of the petitioner, who on realising that the ruling given has not taken note of certain Government notification, sought for rectification of the ruling by another application purporting to be under Rule 27(Q) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, 1957. The Commissioner having responded with an endorsement that the application is not maintainable, the present writ petition.

(2.) SUBMISSION of Sri. Chythanya, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the ruling given by the Commissioner is clearly in ignorance of the Government notification under which the petitioner claims certain benefit; that the ruling being one without taking into consideration the notification, the petitioner had applied for rectification of the ruling invoking Rule 27(Q) of the KST Rules, but the Commissioner has outright rejected it indicating that he has no jurisdiction, and therefore, the present writ petition.

(3.) UNDER the circumstances, I am of the view that the Commissioner is right in rejecting the application seeking review of his ruling, which was filed under Rule 27(Q) of the Kamataka Sales Tax Rules.