L. DAYANANDA Vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REASSESSMENT orders passed under Section 39(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "KVAT Act, 2003") by the first respondent -Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, dated 27 -3 -2014 as well as the order dated 28 -3 -2014 passed by the second respondent -Commercial Tax Officer with regard to assessment period 2007 -2008 and 2010 -2011 (Annexures -B and C) respectively are assailed in these writ petitions. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate who appears on advance of notice to respondents 1 to 3.

(2.) THE main grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent did not have jurisdiction to pass the impugned order (Annexure -B) and therefore, the impugned orders are illegal.

(3.) HAVING regard to the fact that the petitioner has not raised the issue of jurisdiction of the first respondent, who passed the reassessment order, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to raise that issue as well as other issues before the concerned Appellate Authority under Section 62 of the Act, if the petitioner is so advised. With the aforesaid liberty, these writ petitions are dismissed as not maintainable.