BERGER PAINTS INDIA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition coming on for preliminary hearing, is considered for final disposal. The Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner is said to be a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of paints. It is registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The petitioner has maintained books of accounts as per provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act and Rules. The returns filed in VAT 10 for the period 2014 -15 were accepted and deemed assessment orders were concluded under Section 9(2) of the CST Act. While filing the returns the petitioner has claimed deduction towards the sales return which was accepted. In the meanwhile respondent No.3 said to have obtained the assignment note from the Commissioner to conclude the reassessment order for the period 2014 -15. After the notice was issued to the petitioner it had appeared before the third respondent through its representative and produced the books of accounts. On verification respondent No.3 has proposed to reject the same in the absence of C and F declaration forms. The petitioner filed a reply and filed more declaration forms and sought time for filing the balance of declaration form as the petitioner did not readily having the same. The respondent No.3, however, did not choose to grant any further time and passed the Assessment Order dated 23.02.2016. Subsequently the petitioner appears to have filed all the F and C forms and filed an application to take the same into consideration on the date of filing the present petition. That rectification application is still pending adjudication. The petitioner claims that if sufficient time was granted he was in a position to produce all the forms and the respondent No.3 having proceeded to create a huge demand only in the absence of those forms and penalty also having been levied along with interest. Hence the petitioner is before this Court. It does appear that the petitioner having filed all the C and F forms, the same having ignored since they were filed belatedly. If the same were taken into account before any further orders would be passed by the authorities the interest of justice would be met. Accordingly the petition is allowed. The reassessment order passed is quashed. The respondent is directed to consider the C and F forms filed belated by the petitioner before passing any further orders. The petitioner shall appear before the authority on 28.03.2016 without any further notice. The learned Government Advocate is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks.