- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17702-DB WA No. 100386 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. WRIT APPEAL NO. 100386 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SRI MOOKAMBIKA TRADERS, BEING REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI HARISH A., SON OF S.R. AYYADURAI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, D.NO.174/F, VIDYANAGAR, HAVERI 581110 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANTHAVEERANNA K ABBIGERI, ADVOCATE) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT), HAVERI-581110. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHARAD V.MAGADUM, ADDL. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON BLE COURT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01.08.2024 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.105098 OF 2017 (T-RES). CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17702-DB WA No. 100386 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) Heard Sri. Shanthaveeranna K.Abbigeri, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, and Sri. Sharad V.Magadum, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the respondent. 2. The petitioner was before the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 105098/2017 questioning the reassessment order dated 31.05.2017, passed under Section 39(1) read with Section 36 and 72 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, ‘the KVAT Act’), and also the notice, dated 18.04.2017, issued under Section 39(1) read with Section 36 and 72(2) of the KVAT Act. 3. The learned Single Judge, under impugned order dated 01.08.2024, dismissed the writ petition with an observation that the petitioner is provided with an alternative - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17702-DB WA No. 100386 of 2024 and efficacious statutory remedy under Section 62 of the KVAT Act. Questioning the said order, the petitioner is before this Court in this appeal. 4. On hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Addl. Government Advocate for the respondent, we do not find any error or illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner was before the learned Single Judge questioning the notice, dated 18.04.2017, issued for re-assessment and consequent re-assessment order dated 31.05.2017 passed under Section 39(1) read with Section 36 and 72 of the KVAT Act. Section 62 of the KVAT Act provides remedy of appeal to any person objecting to any order or proceedings affecting him passed under the provisions of the KVAT Act by the prescribed authority to the prescribed appellate authority. Normally, when a statute provides for a statutory remedy, this Court would restrain itself from exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As Section 62 of the KVAT Act provides - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17702-DB WA No. 100386 of 2024 for a statutory remedy of appeal, it is for the appellant to avail such statutory remedy. 6. With the above observation, this writ appeal stands rejected. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE KMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23