BharatTaxGST

M/S. Oceanus Dwellings PVT. LTD vs. The State Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(C)/36402/2018HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01084222201809 November 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU4 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY ,THE 09TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1940 WP(C).No. 36402 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: M/S. OCEANUS DWELLINGS PVT. LTD PRIYADARSHINI NAGAR, PUTHUR, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY K.A. FRANCIS, REGIONAL MANAGER BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD - 678 001 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,PALAKKAD-678001. BY GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 WP(C).No. 36402 of 2018

JUDGMENT The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act' for short) questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed stay and delay petition in the appeal. The delay is stated to be 56 days. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay and delay petitions and the appeal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3.

I reckon the petitioner has exercised his statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also filed stay and delay petitions. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay and delay petitions. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2nd respondent considers the stay and delay petitions. I also hope that the 2nd respondent will dispose of the stay and delay petitions expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU SB/13/11/2018 JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL //// P.A TO JUDGE

Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.