Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 19394
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFO RE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO.10752 OF 2022 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
M/S. SRS STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED
SY.NO.43/P16, 102 SEETHANAYAKANAHALLI, LAKKUR HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR.…PETITIONER
(BY SRI MANOJ KUMAR B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SRINANDAN K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R TH EP E R S E E S C E R N E T T E A D R Y B Y T O GOVERNMENT D M i A g H ita A l L ly A s K ig S n H e M d I b B y M DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, L C o O c U at R io T n O : F HIGH V B I E K N A G S A L S U O R U U D - H 5 A 6 , 0 001.KARNATAKA
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.
3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, O & M SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY, MALUR-563130. …RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI RAO, HCGP FOR R-1;SMT. SUMANA NAGANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3)
ORDER
i. The writ petition is hereby allowed.
ii. The impugned demand notice dated 12.05.2022 (Annexure-R) and the order dated 18.12.2021 (Annexure-Q) are hereby quashed.
iii. The BESCOM shall calculate the electricity at the rate as held by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Southern Ferro and pass appropriate orders within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
_____________________
JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
MBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 12.05.2022 ANNEXURE-R ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3; DIRECT AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS TO REFUND THE EXCESS TAX PAID TAX AND COLLECTED FOR THE MONTHS TO APRIL2021 TO APRIL 2022 AT THE EARLIEST.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL ORDER
The core issue involved in this writ petition is “whether electricity tax is liable to be levied on electricity procured through Open Access at the rate at which it is purchased from Open Access Source or at the rate at which the licensee (BESCOM) supplies electricity to the consumer?”
2. The petitioner is an industrial consumer of electricity supplied by the BESCOM and is also procuring electricity through Open Access. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have levied electricity tax at the higher tariff applicable to BESCOM supply, even in respect of the electricity procured through Open Access, which is available at a lower rate. Aggrieved by such levy and the issuance of demand notices, the petitioner has approached this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this petition is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Southern Ferro Ltd., Vs. The State of Karnataka and others, W.P. No.105054/2017 D.D. 15.03.2021 (M/s Southern Ferro).
4. Learned counsel for the BESCOM does not dispute that the issue involved is covered by the decision of the Co-Ordinate Bench in M/s Southern Ferro.
5. This Court has considered the submissions and perused the material on record and is of the considered view that the issue involved in the present writ petition is no longer res integra. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M/s Southern Ferro has held at paragraph No.27 as under:
“27. I am, therefore, of the view that the demand made by HESCOM by computing the tax at the rate at which it was selling electricity to its consumers cannot be the basis for levying and collecting the electricity tax. Annexure-A is, therefore, quashed. HESCOM shall now calculate the electricity tax at the rate at which the petitioner had purchased the electricity from Open Access Source and issue a revised demand within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.”
6. The Co-Ordinate Bench observed that electricity tax cannot be levied at the rate at which the licensee supplies electricity. The tax must be computed on the rate at which the electricity is actually procured through Open Access.
7. In view of the above, the demand raised by the BESCOM by computing the tax at the rate at which it sells electricity to its consumers cannot form the basis for levying and collecting the electricity tax. Accordingly, the impugned demand notices at Annexures-Q and R are liable to be quashed and this Court pass the following:
