Hindustan Unilever Limited vs Government of Karnataka and Another

Ram Mohan Reddy, J.—There can be no more dispute that M/s. TOC Dis-infectants Limited was merged with the petitioner-Company by order dated 25-11-2005 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Company Petition No. 624 of 2005 connected with Company Application No. 334 of 2005 under the Companies Act of 1956, Annexure-C, in terms of the Scheme-Annexure-B, which fact was brought to the notice of local VAT Officer, Malleswaram by letter dated 10-1-2006, Annexure-D of the petitioner, under acknowledgement of the VAT Officer. It appears that the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-2.2) passed an order u/s 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Sections 38 and 39 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, on 16-3-2013, Annexure-G, proposing penalty, interest and tax, totaling to Rs. 1,85,73,095/- payable by M/s. TOC Dis-infectants Limited, and sequentially the demand notice, Annexure-H. Hence, this writ petition. Regard being had to the acknowledgment of the VAT Officer on the petitioner''s letter dated 10-1-2006, Annexure-D, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-2.2) was duty-bound to issue notice to the petitioner and therefore the order, Annexure-G, suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and sequentially the demand notice, Annexure-H is unsustainable.

Reserving liberty to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to issue proposition notice on the petitioner and if so done, petitioner is reserved liberty to raise all pleas as are available to it in law, this petition is accordingly allowed. The order - Annexure-G and demand notice - Annexure-H are quashed.