IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAIORE Dated this the 3rd day of April, 1998 BEFRF THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTIOE V.P.MOHAN KUMAR WRIT P!TITtON No.2466 0? 1998 BETWEEN: /s.C.M.S.Silk Traders, 31, Basavanna Lane, K.R .Settypet, Bangalore—2. (Rep.by Sri.Salaudin, Muelaman, major, Partr) . .. .PETITIOHER (Sri .A . Sathyanaray a, Advoc ate, for the petitioner) AND: 1. Addl.Asst.Commr.of Oomml.Taxes, 23rd Circle, Cbamaraj pet, Bangalore—18 (Assessing Authority) 2. Commr.of Comml,Tas, Karnataka, VTK, Gandhinagar, Bangalore-9 ,. .RFSPONDEN (Smt .Sujatha, HOG?, £or the respondents) Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit quashing the re—assessment order u/s.12—A of the KST Act marked as Annexure—D and the accompany ing demaii notice, (ii) issue a writ in the nature of a declaration that no TOT is leviable for the year I —2— year 90-91 and thus strain permanently the 1 et respondent from taking action whatsoever to 1e and/or collect TOT for that period 90—91, e to, This writ petition having been beard and reserved for orders and. coming on thi a day for pronouncement of orders, the Court pronounced the following: OR_D_ER The petitioner, a dealer in raw and twisted silk yarn, challenges the proceedinge under Sec tion 12-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, whereby he alleges that turover tax is levied on the peti tioner on the purchase of raw silk and sale of silk yarfl during the year 1990-91. 2, The petitioner alleges that with effect from 31-3-1990, Raw silk and Silk yarn is totally exempt from payment of turnover tax, He alle gee that contrary to the statutory provisions ,tbe assessment has been completed as p Anne xu.re-D order by the let respondent, He alleges that the question raised is covered by the decision of this Court in (1994) 94 STO 226, 3, Whatever that be, the petitioner has an effective alternate appeilate remedy under Seo,20 of the Act, The petitioner is, therefore, directed to pursue the appe 11ate remedy, The Appellate Authority may ‘F —2— may entertain the appeal, if the same is preferred within four weeks from today, as if it is preferred within the statutory period. In view of the grant of the interim order by this Court, the recovery of the tax as assessed by Anxxure-D shall be kept in abeysnee till the disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner within the above period, The Writ Petitin is disposed of as above. 1 a Pkc.