Karnataka High Court
Tata Steel Utilities And ... vs The Assistant Commissioner Of on 6 January, 2025
Author: Krishna S Dixit
Bench: Krishna S Dixit
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB
WA No. 3435 of 2019
C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 3435 OF 2019 (T-RES)
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO. 3436 OF 2019 (T-RES)
IN WA No. 3435/2019:
BETWEEN:
TATA STEEL UTILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES LTD
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER INDIAN COMPANIES ACT,
1956,
HAVING CORPORATE OFFICE AT
SACHI BOULEVARD ROAD,
NORTHERN TOWER BISTAPUR,
JAMSHEDPUR-831 001.
AND BRANCH OFFICE AT
Digitally signed SANITARY LANDFILL SEWAGE FARM,
by SHARADA OOTY -NANJANGUD ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURAM,
VANI B G.S.ASHRAMA POST, MYSURU-570 025.
Location: HIGH REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
COURT OF MR.SAURABH SHARMA
KARNATAKA
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. MANEESHA KONGOVI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES-ENFORCEMENT-4,
OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES, MYSURU ZONE,
BIDARAM KRISHNAPPA ROAD,
MYSURU-570 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB
WA No. 3435 of 2019
C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019
2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA-1,
1ST CROSS, GANDHINAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 009.
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE,
BY ITS SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ADITYA VIKRAM BHAT., AGA FOR R1-3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 READ WITH ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
DATED 18/07/2019 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NOS.26628-
26639/2018 [T-RES], AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ALLOW
THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEARING WP
NOS.26628-26639/2018 [T-RES] IN ITS ENTIRETY.
IN WA NO. 3436/2019:
BETWEEN:
TATA STEEL UTILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES
LTD,
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER INDIAN COMPANIES ACT,
1956,
HAVING CORPORATE OFFICE AT
SACHI BOULEVARD ROAD,
NORTHERN TOWER BISTAPUR,
JAMSHEDPUR-831 001.
AND BRANCH OFFICE AT
SANITARY LANDFILL SEWAGE FORM,
OOTY-NANJANGUD ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURAM,
G.S.ASHRAMA POST, MYSURU-570 025.
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
MR.SAURABH SHARMA
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. MANEESHA KONGOVI.,ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB
WA No. 3435 of 2019
C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES-ENFORCEMENT-4,
OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES, MYSURU ZONE,
BIDARAM KRISHNAPPA ROAD,
MYSURU-570 001.
2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA-1,
1ST CROSS, GANDHINAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 009.
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE,
BY ITS SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.ADITYA VIKRAM BHAT., AGA FOR R1-R3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961 READ WITH ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE
DATED 18/07/2019 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NOS.26640-
22651/2018 (T-RES), AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ALLOW
THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEARING WRIT
PETITION NOS.26640-22651/2018 (T-RES) IN ITS ENTIRETY.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB
WA No. 3435 of 2019
C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT) In W.A.No.3435/2019:
This Intra-Court Appeal is directed against a learned Single Judge's common order dated 18.7.2019 in appellant's W.P.Nos.26640-22651/2018 C/w W.P.Nos.26628-26639/2018 (T-RES) whereby challenge to the Assessment Order in question having been kept open, appellant is relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- Assessee vehemently submits that the rule of alternate remedy in writ jurisdiction is only a judicial invention in the country, and that cannot be operated as a Thumb Rule regardless of facts ascertainable from record; if such facts give rise to a right of remedy to the litigant, he cannot be sent back empty handed. She points out that in some Assessment Orders, the transaction of the kind has been treated as a 'composite transaction' whereas in the -5- NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB WA No. 3435 of 2019 C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019 subject Assessment Orders, it is unjustifiably treated otherwise; this aspect having not been properly adverted to by the learned Single Judge, indulgence in appeal is warranted. Lastly, learned counsel argues that the statutory appeal is no efficacious remedy inasmuch as the Assessee has to make pre-deposit of money.
3. Learned AGA appearing for the respondent- Revenue opposes the appeal with equal vehemence contending that in taxation matters like this, ordinarily the Assessee should not be permitted to invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of this court, when appellate remedy avails at large u/s.62 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. He also submits that the requirement of making predeposit for maintaining the statutory appeal is no ground for bypassing it and thereby invoking writ jurisdiction. Lastly he adds that, even otherwise there are no extraordinary circumstances warranting interference of this court. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB WA No. 3435 of 2019 C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having perused the Appeal Papers, we are inclined to grant a limited indulgence in the matter to the effect that appellant can prefer a statutory appeal against the orders that were impugned in the writ petitions subject to he making pre-deposit of 30% of disputed tax along with interest accruing due thereon till the filing of writ petitions i.e., 30.08.2019, within four weeks.
5. Learned AGA is right in telling us that the legal requirement of making pre-deposit of certain monies as a sine qua non is a matter of statutory policy under which right of appeal is created i.e, Sec.62 of 2003 Act and that such a right being a creature of law, the creator of right can condition it subject to fulfillment of which the said right becomes exercisable. However, several exceptions to this broad proposition galore, cannot be much disputed. Appellant's case arguably fits into one of them.
In the above circumstances, this appeal is disposed off permitting the appellant to avail the remedy of statutory appeal under section 62 of the 2003 Act subject -7- NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB WA No. 3435 of 2019 C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019 to depositing 30% of the amount due in terms of the impugned Assessment Orders; the interest accruing due on such amount only till 30.08.2019 shall also be reckoned while computing this.
If appeal is filed within a period of four weeks along with pre-deposit as mentioned above, the issue of delay would not crop up. All contentions of the parties are kept open. We make it clear that we have not laid down any law in this judgment that is rendered fact-specific.
Registry to return the impugned Assessment Orders after retaining photostat copies thereof in record of the cases.
IN W.A.No.3436/2019:
The subject matter of this appeal is substantially similar to the one in W.A.No.3435/2019 wherein reprieve has been accorded to the appellant-assessee. A Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.932-933/1974 between A.V.VINODA & ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, disposed off on 11.12.1974 has observed that the Court should treat like cases alike and if relief is granted to a litigant, similar relief cannot be denied to other similarly circumstanced litigants, there being no -8- NC: 2025:KHC:74-DB WA No. 3435 of 2019 C/W WA No. 3436 of 2019 derogatory circumstances. This applies in all fours to the case of this appellant.
In the above circumstances, this appeal is also disposed off granting the same relief to the appellant as has been accorded in the companion case i.e., W.A.No.3435/2019.
No costs in both the appeals.
Sd/-
(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE cbc List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34