BharatTaxGST

M/S. Deepa Restaurant vs. The Assistant Commissioner

Original PDF →
WP(C)/26890/2018HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01058477201808 August 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 WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1940 WP(C).No. 26890 of 2018 PETITIONER M/S. DEEPA RESTAURANT, TOWN HALL ROAD, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DT., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, M. RAMACHANDRAN. BY ADVS.SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM - 676 505. 2. THE KERALA SALE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL.BENCH, CHEROOTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673 032. 3. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI - 676 121. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26890 of 2018 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. 32100547915/2014-15 DATED 31.07.2017. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL ORDER NO. STA 12 OF 2017 DATED 29.11.2017. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.01.2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 29.01.2018. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 1 DEMAND NOTICE DATED 10.07.18. JJJ DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 26890 of 2018 (I) ------------------------------------------ Dated: 08th August, 2018

J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (KGST Act) on the rolls of the first respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)-I. It resulted in the Ext.P2 order. The petitioner again challenged the Ext.P2 order in the second appeal, before the Appellate Tribunal, the second respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating its grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition and the appeal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

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

W.P.(C) No.26890/2018 -2-

3.

I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time its statutory remedy of filing a second appeal. It appears that it has also filed a 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 steps until the second respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the second respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE jjj 08/08/2018

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.