P.V. GRANITES Vs. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , who has established a Metal Crusher unit, has opted for compounding as provided under Section 8 of the KVAT Act. Their option was accepted and they paid tax for the three quarters also. According to the petitioner, during the 4th quarter, local panchayat issued a stop memo as a result of which, they had to discontinue the manufacturing activity. Therefore, petitioner represented that they may be exempted from payment of tax for the 4th quarter and that application was rejected. There upon, petitioner submitted Ext. P7 for rectification which is pending. It is at that stage, this writ petition is filed, relying on Ext. P8, a judgment of this Court in W.A. 1090/12 to contend that they have no liability to pay tax for the 4th quarter. Provisions of Section 8 of the KVAT Act itself show that the compounding rates accepted by the Department is for one whole year. If that be so, petitioner has the statutory liability to pay tax for the entire year. This liability of the petitioner cannot be affected in any manner, by a stop memo that is issued by the Panchayat. However, counsel for the petitioner contended that the local body being one arm of the State, its action should also affect the liabilities that the petitioner owe to the Sale Tax Department.

(2.) IN my view, such an argument is not available to the petitioner and I am not prepared to think that any order issued by a local body have impact on the tax liability cast on the petitioner on the basis of an option exercised by them for payment of tax at compounded rate as provided under Section 8 of the Act. Insofar as Ext. P8 judgment referred to above is concerned, facts as disclosed in the judgment itself, show that the judgment has no application to the case of the petitioner.