IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NOS.6260-6261 OF 2017 (T-ET) BETWEEN:
N. LAKSHMAN SON OF LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. VENKATESWARA TALKIES, H-CROSS, SIDLAGATTA TALUK, CHICKBALLAPUR-562 101.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI K.M. SHIVAYOGISWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER VSO-183, CHICKBALLAPUR-562 101.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP) THESE WRIT APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 READ WITH RULE 27 OF THE WRIT PROCEEDINGS RULES, 1977 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NOS.28640- 28641 OF 2017 (T-ET) DATED 22/09/2017 AND TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT.
***** THESE WRIT APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 22-9-2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos.28640-641 of 2017, dismissing the writ petitions while relegating the petitioner to the alternative remedy, the present appeals are filed.
2. The only contention of the appellant is that he was denied an opportunity of cross-examining the witness as led-in by the respondents. The specific ground to that effect has been taken in para-16. However, the learned Single Judge considered the question of alternate remedy and dismissed the petitions.
3. On hearing learned counsels, we are of the view that appropriate interference is called for. When a specific plea is made for cross-examining the witness, necessarily the same requires to be granted. In the absence of granting an adequate opportunity, the rights of the appellant stands affected. Therefore, the question of relegating him to an alternate remedy would be inappropriate.
Under these circumstances, the Writ Appeals are allowed.
a) The order dated 22-9-2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos.28640-641 of 2017 is set aside. The writ petitions are allowed.
b) The impugned assessment order dated 4-4-2017 and the consequent demand notice dated 4-4-2017, in relation to vide Annexures-E and F are set aside.
The matter is remanded to respondent No.2 to grant an opportunity to the appellant to cross-examine the person who has submitted the information and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. Appeals are disposed off accordingly.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE rsk/-