SATYA SAI CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the re- assessment order dated 29.04.2019 and the consequential demand notice dated 30.04.2019 passed by the respondent No.2 under the provisions of Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ['Act' for short] relating to the tax periods 2014-15 as well as the endorsement issued by the respondent No.2 dated 17.07.2019 at Annexures-D, E and H respectively.

(3.) The petitioner is a partnership concern and carrying on the business as builders and developers, registered under the provisions of the Act and borne on the file of LVO-150-A. It is submitted that the returns were filed under the provisions of the Act and the respondent-authority has initiated re-assessment proceedings under Section 39[1] of the Act by issuing proposition notice to which the petitioner has duly replied bringing to the notice of the respondent- authority regarding the details of the sub-contractor - Assessee who is assessed to tax in Karnataka by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax [Audit]-5.4, DVO-5, Bengaluru. The re-assessments were concluded by the respondent-authority disallowing the deduction regarding the sub-contractors turnover on the basis that the assessee has failed to provide the documentary evidence in support of the same like, RA bills, Value of work done, payment proof etc.