D V PATIL Vs. COMMR OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are filed under Section 24 (1) of the Karnataka, Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the orders passed by the Commissioner of commercial Taxes in Karnataka, Bangalore, (here inafter referred, to as the Commissioner) under Section 22A of the Act revising the orders passed, by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Dharwar. The assessee, the appellant in these two cases, is ; dealer carrying on business in chillies, groundnut, cotton, etc. The assessment years are 1969-70 and 1970-71. By his assessment orders the Commercial Tax Officer, Ranebennur, concluded the assessments under the Act levying purchase tax under S. 6 of the Act on the purchase turnover of chillies. He also passed an order under S. 12A of the Act levying purchase tax on the purchase turnover of chillies which had escaped assessment earlier. In the appeals filed by the assessee, the Deputy Commissioner Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Dharwar, following the, decision of the Court in B. S. Guddad & Sons v. The State of Mysore 34 STC 421 modified, the orders of assessment directing the Commercial Tax Officer to restrict the levy of tax under S. 6 to the purchase turnover made up of the purchases from small dealers and to exempt the purchases made from agriculturists.

(2.) Accordingly, the, Commercial Tax Officer redetermined the taxable turnover under S. 6 of the Act. After the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. M. K. Kandaswami 36 STC. 191, SC the Commissioner initiated action under S. 22A of the Act to revise the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and the consequential orders passed by the Commercial Tax Officer as he was of the view that the orders were erroneous and prejudicial to| the, interests of the revenue. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the assessee, the Commissioner passed qrders revising the orders passed in appeal by the Deputy Commissioner and the consequential orders of assessment passed by the Commercial Tax Officer in respect of the two periods 1969-70 and 1970-71 and restoring the original orders of assessment passed by the Commercial Tax Officer. He also restored the order passed under S. 12A by the Commercial Tax Officer. Aggrieved by the said orders passed in revision, the assessee has filed these appeals.

(3.) When the above cases came up before a Division Bench for hearing, the Division Bench felt that the decision in the case of B. S. Guddad & Sons required to be re-considered and it accordingly referred the following question of law under S. 7 of the Karnataka, High Court Act to a Full Bench: -