Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a reassessment made pursuant to a direction under section 64(2) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was barred by limitation under section 40 of the Act.
Analysis: Section 40(1) bars assessment or reassessment after five years from the end of the prescribed tax period, while section 40(3) excludes, for limitation computation, the time taken in disposal of appeals and revisional proceedings. The reassessment in question was not a continuation of the original appellate or revisional proceedings; it was made in compliance with the Commissioner's order under section 64(2), which expressly empowered the Commissioner to direct a fresh assessment. A direction for fresh assessment under section 64(2) does not fall within the exclusion contemplated by section 40(3). Consequently, limitation commenced from the Commissioner's order directing fresh assessment, and the reassessment made thereafter was within time.
Conclusion: The reassessment was not barred by limitation and the challenge to the demand failed.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was dismissed, while leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a fresh assessment is directed under the Commissioner's revisionary power, the limitation for the resulting reassessment runs from the date of that direction and is not governed by the exclusion applicable to the disposal of appeals or revisions under the limitation provision.