G. Rajashekar Vs. State of Karnataka and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....he be allowed to be recorded as party - considering evidence and affidavit it was held that applicant had interest in matter in terms of earlier proceedings - therefore applicant allowed to be brought on record. - karnataka value added tax act, 2003 [k.a. no. 30/2005] section 2(24): [d.v.shylendra kumar,j] prescribed authority - whether there should be only one prescribed authority and whether assessee has the right to insist that a particular officer alone must examine the affairs of his business held, the assessee has no right to insist that a particular officer alone must examine the affairs of the business transactions of the assessee. the only requirement under the statutory provision is that the person should be a prescribed authority. there is no limitation either on the government or on the commissioner to prescribe only one authority as prescribed authority. there may be several authorities who are also designated with the power to act as prescribed authority. that by itself will not render the action bad in law. - as well as on the mainmatter to save time.orderr. gururajan, j.1. matter is listed for orders. two impleading applications are filed in addition to the one for vacating the stay. all the applications are taken up together for consideration. petition is also taken up for final disposal with consent of the learned counsel.2. learned counsel on either side argued both on the i. as. as well as on the mainmatter to save time.

Judgment:

ORDER

R. Gururajan, J.

1. Matter is listed for orders. Two impleading applications are filed in addition to the one for vacating the stay. All the applications are taken up together for consideration. Petition is also taken up for final disposal with consent of the learned counsel.

2. Learned counsel on either side argued both on the I. As. as well as on the mainmatter to save time.