Stm C K Shantha vs. State Of Karnataka
Facts
The petitioners, Smt. C. K. Shantha and others, challenged a demand notice dated 03.03.2020 issued by the Joint Director, Town Planning (North), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). The notice demanded various charges including scrutiny fee, license fee, ground rent, GST, security deposit, and Construction Workers Welfare Cess. The petitioners sought to quash this demand notice. The present writ petition raises identical issues to those previously considered in W.P.No.4601/2020 and connected cases, which were disposed of by a prior order of this Court dated 04.08.2021. The petitioners are represented by Sri T.P.Vivekananda, and the respondents include the State of Karnataka and the BBMP.
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition raises identical issues to those previously adjudicated in W.P.No.4601/2020 and connected cases, which were disposed of by an order dated 04.08.2021. Consequently, this writ petition was also disposed of by following the order passed in the aforementioned batch of petitions. The specific findings or reasoning from the order dated 04.08.2021, which this judgment adopts, are not detailed within this judgment. Therefore, the ratio decidendi and the specific operative directions are not explicitly stated here but are implicitly incorporated by reference to the prior order. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the demand notice dated 03.03.2020, issued by the Joint Director, Town Planning (North), BBMP, is liable to be quashed in its entirety or in part, specifically concerning the demands for scrutiny fee, license fee, ground rent, GST, security deposit, and Construction Workers Welfare Cess. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners sought to quash the entire demand notice, as detailed in the facts. They argued that the amounts demanded, including GST, were not legally leviable or were improperly calculated. The specific grounds for challenging each component of the demand were not elaborated in this judgment, but the prayer indicates a challenge to all components. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State of Karnataka (respondents 1 and 2) or the BBMP (respondents 3 and 4) in response to the petitioners' challenge. The order indicates that the petition was disposed of by following a previous order in identical matters.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.6469/2020 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN
SMT. C. K. SHANTHA AGED 62 YEARS W/O M. VENAKTESH NO.107, 2ND A MAIN ROAD YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BENGALURU - 560065
SRI M V MUNIRAJU AGED 42 YEARS S/O M VENKATESH NO.107, 2ND A MAIN ROAD YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BENGALURU - 560065
SRI Y. M. SRINIVASA MURTHY AGED 70 YEARS, S/O M V MUNIYAPPA NO.354, 13TH A MAIN, MEC SCHOOL, A SECTOR, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BENGALURU - 560064
SRI M RAVI KUMAR AGED 65 YEARS S/O M V MUNIYAPPA NO 1289, 13TH MAIN JUDICIAL LAYOUT
2 GKVK, BENGALURU - 560065 ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI T.P.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE (VIDEO CONFERENCING))
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002. REPRESENTED BY
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.