SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(SC) 396

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, KULDIP SINGH
State of Karnataka – Appellant
Versus
Sunagar Brothers – Respondent


Advocates:
M.VIRAPPA, NOBIN SINGH

JUDGMENT

Kuldip Singh, J.

1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the mandate, under Section 20(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (the Act), to pay the undisputed tax before the appeal is entertained, is also applicable to the additional tax payable under Section 6-B of the Act. In other words whether it is obligatory under the Act to deposit the tax and the additional tax before the appeal is entertained.

2. The respondent-assessee challenged the best judgment assessment made against him for the year 1972-73 before the first appellate authority which was dismissed in limine on the ground that the respondent failed to pay the tax "not disputed in appeal". The second appeal filed by the assessee before the Kamataka Appellate Tribunal was also dismissed. On a revision petition under the Act the Karnataka High Court reversed the findings of the authorities below on the ground that unpaid "not disputed" tax was the additional tax which was different than the tax envisaged under Section 20(3) of the Act. The High Court allowed the revision petition of the assessee and remanded the matter to the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top