/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF KiRNATAiQ% AT BANGi4L0Ri. DATED fl413 ThE 2nd Y OF JUNE, 1998 • BEFcRE THE HON’BLE MR.JUsTICE V.K.sINGHAJ. ( aE13eEEN: M/s.Sheeba Polysacks (P)Ltd., Rep.by its Gunapa]. Shetty, Managing Director, No.56, Magadi Main 1oad 0 Krna kshipalya, Bangalore— 560 079. ..• Petitioner. (By Sd .Vassan Associates, for Petitioner. AND: 1.1 Govt.of Karnataka, Rep.by it 5 Finance Secretary, Vidharia souda, Bangalore, ..• Respondent. —2. —2— 2 ,The puty Cornmi ssioner of commercial Taxes, (Azsesientg—2 >0 City Djviion,—II. Baralore— 9. ... Respondents. (By St. s. Suja tha, Hp for Respondents,) Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with an affidavit, praying to Quash vide Anrix— A to C at :25 • 3.98 respectively by and etc., Writ petition is Corning Ofl for preli minary hearing this dy the Court made the following: 0 R DER The question is about the classification of HDPE Fabics/Sacks. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the —3, —3-. matter is pending before the Apex Court. In tnis petition, the assessment order — has been challenged. In the natter of classification of a commodity, it ths been held by the Apex Court in the case of — Delhi Cloth Mills — Vs.-. R.R,Gupta(38 lic 113) that the High., Should not interfere under Art.226 of the Constitution and it is for the Taxing Authority to determine the nature and classification of a cornitodity. It may require evidence to be produced from either side and as such since the assessnent ha already been finalizecLthe petitioner - may file appeal before the Appellate authority within 4 weeks from to—day. If the appeal is filed with the aforesaid period no objection — 4. 4- —4— cd regarding limitation oanet be taken, ‘I petition stands disposed of with the above observcitions. Sd/—JUrGE ss. r . by: copy c.by: Assistant Registr frligh Court of Karnataka bauga1or—5óO 001.