Admitted first-purchase tax liability sustained where assessments stood independent of the challenged Karnataka sales tax provision.

Assessment orders levying tax on admitted first purchases of cardamoms were upheld because the liability arose on the appellants' own admissions, independent of section 6-A(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The court held that, where declared goods were purchased first and taxed under the State sales tax scheme, the assessing authority did not need to rely on the challenged provision. It also applied the settled rule that constitutional validity should not be examined when the dispute can be resolved on other grounds. The challenge to section 6-A(2) was therefore left open, and the assessments were not quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment orders levying tax on the appellants' admitted first purchases of cardamoms could be quashed on the ground that section 6-A(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 was void as repugnant to article 286(3) of the Constitution read with section 15(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Analysis: The appellants' liability arose from their admitted first purchases of cardamoms, which were declared goods taxed under section 5(4) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 read with Schedule IV. The Court found that the assessing authority did not need to invoke section 6-A(2) because the appellants themselves had admitted first-purchase liability in respect of purchases from commission agents. On those admitted facts, the assessments were sustainable without deciding the constitutional validity of section 6-A(2). The Court also applied the settled principle that constitutional questions should not be pronounced upon when the case can be decided on other grounds.

Conclusion: The challenge to the assessment orders failed. The constitutional question regarding section 6-A(2) was left open, and the assessments were not liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were dismissed with costs, and the assessment orders were sustained on the basis of the appellants' own admissions.

Ratio Decidendi: A constitutional challenge need not be decided, and cannot defeat an assessment, where the impugned demand is otherwise sustainable on admitted facts independent of the challenged provision.

---