SRINIVASA STRUCTURALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these petitions are filed by the very same assessee being aggrieved by the common order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal/Bangalore, and hence are taken up for final disposal. For the assessment year 1995 -96, the petitioner had declared a gross turnover (GTO) of Rs. 1,28,94,887 and for the assessment year 1996 -97, a sum of Rs. 1,31,85,519.25 was declared as GTO. The assessing authority has levied tax and allowed set -off of tax paid on purchase of raw materials and thereby, demanded tax. Aggrieved by the assessment orders, the petitioner preferred two appeals before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), who confirmed the levy of tax and dismissed both the appeals. Thereafter, the appellant has preferred second appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, wherein, by the common order dated April 18, 2007, the Tribunal held that the goods manufactured and sold by the assessee do not fall under entry 2(a)(vi) of the Fourth Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act") but, they fall under entry 2(a)(v) of the Fourth Schedule to the Act and accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities were confirmed. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petitions are filed.

(2.) SRI Indra Kumar, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, contends that the findings recorded by the lower authorities are improper and liable to be set aside. He contends that the commodities being dealt with by the petitioner -assessee fall under entry 2(a)(vi) of the Fourth Schedule to the Act, inasmuch as the commodities such, as cold rolled strips in coil form are purchased by the assessee from dealers and are subjected to the process of bending and corrugation. Therefore, entry 2(a)(v) of the Fourth Schedule to the Act referring to steel structurals, including angles, joists, channels, tees, sheet piling sections, Z sections, etc., cannot be made applicable to the petitioner. In order to support his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in Telangana Steel Industries v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1994] 93 STC 187(SC).

(3.) ENTRY 2(a)(v) of the Fourth Schedule reads as follows : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_2467_TLKAR0_2011.htm</FRM>