Vijayan Antony vs. Asst Commissioner (Works Contract) - Kerala High Court, 16 October 2018

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY ,THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 24TH ASWINA, 1940 WP(C).No. 33859 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: VIJAYAN ANTONY AGED 53 YEARS PROPRIETOR M/S MATHA CONSTRUCTIONS, HOUSE NO.478, VIVEKANANDA LANE, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN CODE 695013. BY ADVS. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN SRI.V.JAYANANDAKUMAR RESPONDENT/S: 1 ASST COMMISSIONER (WORKS CONTRACT) STATE GST DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN 695 002 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) STATE GST DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695002. 3 THE SECRETARY THE KVAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ADDL BENCH,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695010. 4 THE DY.TAHSILDAR(RR) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695023. 5 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY(TAXES),THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695001. DR THUSHARA JAMES GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 33859 of 2018 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Exts.P1 assessment order, before the 2nd respondent, who rejected it. Later, the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent with Ext.P3 second appeal. The petitioner has also filed stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

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

I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time his statutory remedy of filing appeals. It appears that he has also filed stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive

WP(C).No. 33859 of 2018 3 steps until the 3rd respondent consider the stay petition. I also hope that the 3rd respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE hmh

WP(C).No. 33859 of 2018 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32011365407/13-14 DATED 27/6/2016 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXHIBIT P2OF THE ORDER NO.K-699/17 DATED 27/3/2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN FORM 31 DATED 01/08/2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 01/08/2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS COPY OF THE NOTICE RRC NO.2018/10936/01 DT.30/8/2018 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT WITH TRANSLATION. NIL //// PA to Judge