- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:555-DB TAET No. 3 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA TAX APPEAL ON ENTRY TAX NO. 3 OF 2020 BETWEEN: M/S TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR AUTO PARTS PVT LTD., PLOT NO. 21, BIDADI INDUSTRIAL AREA, RAMANAGARAM TALUK, BENGLAURU RURAL DIST 562 109. REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT - ADMINISTRATION MR. M.I. PRASANNA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O MR. INDRA KUMAR. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RABINATHAN G.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ZONE-II, 6TH FLOOR, VANIJAY THERIGE KARYALAYA-1, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU 560 009. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, (ENFORCEMENT)-42, INTELLIGENCE WING SOUTH ZONE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 047. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ADITYA VIKRAM BHAT, AGA) THIS TAET FILED UNDER SEC.16 OF THE KARNATAKA TAX ON ENTRY OF GOODS ACT, 1979 AGAINST THE ORDER Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:555-DB TAET No. 3 of 2020 DATED 24.02.2020 PASSED IN ADCOM/ZONE-II/DVO- 2/SMR/CR-07/2019-20 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMML.TAXES ZONE-II 6th FLOOR, VTK-1 GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU, SETTING ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20.04.2018 PASSED BY THE CTO (ENFORCEMENT)-42, SOUTH ZONE, BENGALURU UNDER SEC.5(4) AND 7(2) OF THE KTEG ACT, 1979, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. THIS TAET COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT) The Assessee-Company has filed this appeal under Section 16 of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979 calling in question the order dated 24.02.2020 made by the 1st respondent-Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, whereby the Assessment Order dated 20.04.2018 handed by the 2nd respondent-Commercial Tax Officer, having been revised u/s 15(2), is set at naught. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant though urged several contentions, he stressed the point of jurisdiction telling us that an Assessment Order passed by - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:555-DB TAET No. 3 of 2020 the CTO is not revisable. In support of this, he pressed into service a Co-ordinate Bench decision in KIRLOSKAR POWER SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., vs. STATE, 2006 SCC OnLine KAR 934. Learned AGA appearing for the respondents with equal vehemence resisted the appeal making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which it has been constructed. He tells us that section 15 employs the expression ‘any proceedings’ and therefore, the proceedings that culminated into impugned order would fit into the said expression. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Appeal Papers, we are inclined to grant interference in the matter inasmuch as the question as to revisability of Assessment Order of the kind is no longer res integra. In KIRLOSKAR POWER SUPPLY COMPANY, supra, at paragraphs 5, 6 & 7, it is observed as under: “5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State would say that the revisional authority was - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:555-DB TAET No. 3 of 2020 justified in the light of the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. She would say that what is impermissible in law is done by the assessing officer and that therefore the revisional authority is justified in the case on hand. 6. After hearing, we have carefully perused the material on record. 7. Section 15 of the Karnataka Entry Tax Act provides for revisional powers to the Commissioner, Additional Commissioner, Joint Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner. The Commissioner has power of revision as against an order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Joint Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner. Additional Commissioner has power of revision as against the order passed by the Joint Commissioner. Joint commissioner similarly has revisionary powers in case of an order being passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Jurisdiction is clearly defined under section 15 of the Act. In the case on hand, it is seen that the Additional Commissioner has rightly invoked his power under section 15 of the Act for the purpose of revising the order passed by the Joint Commissioner. However, while passing the final order he has chosen to set aside the subsequent assessment order passed by the assessing authority. This could not have been done by him in terms of section 15 of the Act. Mr. Prasad, learned counsel, is therefore right in his submission that in making the revisional order dated December 9.” - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:555-DB TAET No. 3 of 2020 In the light of above position of law, it is difficult to countenance the contention of learned AGA that the expression ‘any proceedings’ employed in Section 15 would include the order of the Commercial Tax officer and therefore, the impugned order is sustainable. In the above circumstances, this appeal is allowed; the impugned order is set at naught. Costs made easy. Sd/- (KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE Snb/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40