State of Karnataka vs Golden Nest Builders and Developers

Dilip B. Bhosale, J.—Learned A.G.A. appearing for the petitioner-State in all fairness, states that the questions of law raised in these revision petitions and the questions of law raised in S.T.R.P. No. 240 of 2011 and connected revision petitions are identical. She submits that S.T.R.P. No. 240 of 2011 and connected revision petitions have already been disposed of by this Court by pronouncing judgment in the open Court. Both the questions raised in those revision petitions, according to learned Counsel for the petitioner, are similar to the questions raised in these revision petitions and that the questions have been answered against the petitioner-State. In view thereof, she submits that these revision petitions may also be disposed of, answering the questions of law raised in these S.T.R.P.''s against the petitioner-State and in favour of the respondent-assessee. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee also confirms that the questions of law involved in these revision petitions and in S.T.R.P. No. 240 of 2011 and connected revision petitions are identical and they are answered by the Division Bench against the petitioner and in favour of respondent-assessee.

In the circumstances, these revision petitions are dismissed, in terms of the judgment in S.T.R.P. No. 240 of 2011 and connected revisions.