AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Gururajan, J.-We have heard Smt. Sujatha, learned Government Advocate both on I.A. No. I of 2006 as well as merits of the matter.
The State has come in appeal against the orders passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore. The Tribunal has passed orders in STA Nos. 1947 and 1948 of 2004, dated 10-1-2006.
The assessee suffered certain adverse orders at the hands of the Assessing Officer and appeals were filed by the assessee. The assessee was successful before the Appellate Authority. Thereafter, the State filed an appeal for the second time before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has chosen to dismiss the appeals filed by the State. Hence, the State is before us. The State has raised the following substantial question of law for our consideration. It is as under:
"In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal was justified in giving a finding that "Foundation Basket Assembly" known as "Studs and Bolts" fits into the description of goods specified under Entry 57 of the Fifth Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 eligible for exemption under Section 8 of the KST Act?"
In this case, after hearing the learned Government Advocate for the State, we have carefully perused the order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has placed reliance on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Enercon (India) Limited, Mumbai v State of Karnataka, 2004(57) Kar. L.J. 409 (HC) (DB). We have gone through the said judgment. As rightly held by the Tribunal, the said judgment covers this case. In the circumstances, we do not find any substantial question of law for our decision. In the light of our coming to the conclusion that the order has to be accepted, there is no need to issue notice on I.A. No. I of 2006. In the result, I.A. No. I of 2006 as well as the petition stand rejected.