- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34322-DB STRP No. 30 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND SALES TAX REVISION PETITION NO.30/2022 BETWEEN: M/S. LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED., ECC DIVISION, NO.19 I AND II FLOOR KUMARA KRUPA ROAD SHIVANANDA CIRCLE BENGALURU-560001 (REP. BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER ANTARA SEN) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ATUL KRISHNA RAO ALUR, ADV.) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS)-1, TTMC BMTC BUS STAND SHANTHINAGARA BENGALURU-560 027. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (AUDIT)-1.3 DVO-1, TTMC, BMTC COMPLEX YESHWANTHPURA BENGALURU- 560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADITYA VIKARAM BHAT, AGA) Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34322-DB STRP No. 30 of 2022 THIS STRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 65(1) OF KARNATAKA VALUE ADDED TAX 2003 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.08.2021 PASSED IN STA NO.405/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2018 PASSED IN CST AP NO.43/2017-18 (A.Y.2013-14) ON THE FILE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (APPEALS-1) BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE RECTIFICATION ORDER DATED 12.02.2018 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT) 1.3, VAT DIVISION-1, BENGALURU, FOR THE TAX PERIODS APRIL 2013 TO MARCH-2014. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V.ARAVIND) Heard Sri Atul Krishna Rao Alur, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Aditya Vikram Bhat, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent. 2. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CST Act’). The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes issued a proposition notice dated 10.01.2018 under Section 9(2) of the CST Act read with Sections 39(1) and 36(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, proposing to determine the tax liability for failure to submit Form-C declarations. In response - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34322-DB STRP No. 30 of 2022 to the proposition notice, the assessee-company did not file the statutory forms. Consequently, an order dated 31.01.2018 was passed determining the demand. The appeal filed by the assessee was rejected by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) by order dated 28.09.2018. On further appeal by the assessee, the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’), by the impugned order dated 12.08.2021, remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority to accept the Form-C filed/uploaded as on the date of the Tribunal’s order. Accordingly, the matter was remanded for re-computation and to conclude reassessment afresh. 3. The assessee is before this Court in the present revision petition with a limited grievance. Sri Atul Krishna Rao Alur, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that due to the company’s substantial turnover spread across the country, the requisite Forms could not be secured within the stipulated time, and the Authority, without granting any further time, proceeded to conclude the assessment. It is submitted that the Forms were subsequently secured and uploaded during the pendency - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34322-DB STRP No. 30 of 2022 of the appeal. Further, it is submitted that after the disposal of the appeal, additional Forms have been secured which require consideration by the Assessing Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prays that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee for consideration of Form-C, E-I, and E-II. 4. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the assessee has failed to produce the requisite Forms within the prescribed time. It is submitted that the Tribunal, adopting a lenient view, had already extended the opportunity to consider the requisite Forms submitted/uploaded up to the date of the Tribunal’s order. Learned AGA further submits that the period of assessment pertains to 2013-14, and at this stage, it is not permissible to grant yet another opportunity. It is also submitted that under the relevant Rules, the requisite Forms are to be submitted by the end of the month in which the declaration is made. Learned AGA further contends that the order of remand has already been given effect to, and a re- doing of the proceedings at this stage is not permissible. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34322-DB STRP No. 30 of 2022 5. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers. 6. The short issue that requires consideration is whether the assessee is entitled to one more opportunity to submit Forms- C, E-I, and E-II. A specific contention urged by the State is that such a request is barred by the statutory time limit. However, we note that for the assessment period 2013-14, the Tribunal, in the impugned order, has permitted submission and consideration of the requisite Forms up to the date of the Tribunal’s order. Having regard to the fact that the indirect tax regime has changed since 2017, if the assessee is granted one more opportunity, which shall be final, no prejudice would be caused to the interest of the State. 7. Without examining the questions raised in the appeal and having regard to the peculiar facts of the present case, the petitioner is permitted to submit/upload the requisite Forms-C, E-I, and E-II as on today. To that extent, the matter is hereby remanded to the Assessing Authority to undertake reassessment. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34322-DB STRP No. 30 of 2022 ninety (90) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. We have not expressed any opinion on the questions raised in the appeal memo, and in view of the order of remand, the said questions remain unanswered. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending applications stand disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52