IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.44778/2019 (T – RES) BETWEEN:
M/s. KAIZEN DIGITAL CABLE SERVICES [P] LTD., No.169/10, GURUKRUPA 12TH CROSS, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT BANGALORE-560086.
[REP. SRI N.SHASHIKANTH, DIRECTOR]. …PETITIONER (BY SRI Y.C.SHIVAKUMAR, ADV.) AND:
1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REP. BY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES KARNATAKA, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAYA KALIDASA ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU-560009.
2. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [APPEALS]-6, 2ND FLOOR TTMC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR BENGALURU-560027.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [AUDIT]-6.4 DIVISIONAL VAT OFFICE-6 3RD FLOOR, KIADB BUILDING 14TH CROSS, PEENYA 2ND STAGE BENGALURU-560058. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T.K.VEDAMURTHY, AGA.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SINCE THE ORDERS OF THE RESPONDENT Nos.2 AND 3 ARE ARBITRARY ILLEGAL AND BEYOND THEIR JURISDICTION WHICH AMOUNTS TO DOUBLE TAXATION QUASH THE ORDERS IN STA No.112/2019 [CH.3] AND IN STA No.113/2019 [CH-3] DATED 25.07.2019 AT ANNEXURES-A AND A1 OF THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL; AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 25.07.2019 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bengaluru [‘Tribunal’ for short] in STA Nos.112/2019 and 113/2019 whereby the I.A filed by the petitioner to dispense with the deposit of 30% of disputed tax has been rejected.
3. The petitioner was a registered dealer under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 [‘Act’ for short] engaged in providing television service as defined under Section 66 [105] [zs] of the Finance Act, 1994. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the demand made by the authorities under the Act results in double taxation, the same has not been properly appreciated by the Tribunal while considering the I.A filed, seeking waiver of the deposit of 30% of the disputed tax.
4. Section 63[7][a] of the Act contemplates that the Appellate Tribunal may, in its discretion, stay payment of seventy percent of the tax or other amount disputed, if the appellant makes payment of the thirty percent of the tax or other amount disputed along with the prescribed form of appeal. This payment of 30% of the tax or the other amount disputed is mandatory and the same cannot be waived of, as claimed by the petitioner. Hence, there is no substance in the writ petition to set aside the order impugned.
5. However, considering the totality of the circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the Tribunal to dispose of the appeals in STA Nos.112/2019 and 113/2019 in an expedite manner preferably within a period of three months from today.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.