Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 31682 OF 2017 PETITIONER:
P.V.RADHAKRISHNAN PROPRIETOR, M/S. LAKSHMI AGENCIES, DOOR NO. 111/136, CHILANJICHAL, PARIYARAM P.O, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.RAGHUNATH SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN RESPONDENT:
INTELLIGENCE OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.11, MATTANCHERRY AT KARUKUTTY-680 308.
SRI. SAYED M. THANGAL - SPL.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 31682 OF 2017 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of July, 2024 The above writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the respondent to quash Exts.P4 and P5, order and notice respectively under CGST/SGST Act. The petitioner, an arecanut dealer, is an assessee on the files of the Sales Tax Officer, State Goods and Service Tax Department, Pattambi. He was holding registration under the KVAT and CST Acts.
2.
On 19.09.2017, the petitioner purchased dried arecanuts with husk and transported the goods to Malappuram and to the premises of the petitioner. While in transit, the goods were detained by the respondent on 20.09.2017.
Thereafter, Ext.P2 notice was issued to the petitioner. Though Ext.P3 objection was filed by the petitioner, Ext.P4 order dated 23.09.2017 was passed by the respondent imposing tax and penalty for the offences committed under Section 129(4) of the SGST / CGST Acts (In short “the Acts”). Thereafter, Ext.P5 notice was issued by the respondent under Section 129(6) of the Acts, 2017, affording an opportunity to the petitioner to remit the above mentioned amount on or before 26.09.2017.
Aggrieved by Exts.P4 and P5, the petitioner has approached
WP(C) NO. 31682 OF 2017 3 this Court with the above writ petition.
3.
Today, when the case was taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is willing to file an appeal against Ext.P4 and accordingly, the writ petition may be disposed of, permitting the petitioner to file an appeal.
Considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of as follows:
i) The petitioner may file an appeal against Ext.P4 before the competent statutory authority, if so advised, in accordance with law. It is made clear that while considering the appeal and delay condonation petition if any, the period during which the writ petition was pending before this Court shall be taken into consideration.
ii) The petitioner shall produce the certified copy of the judgment along with the copy of the writ petition before the competent authority for compliance.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE RK
WP(C) NO. 31682 OF 2017 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31682/2017 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE INVOICE NO.2352 DATED 19TH SEPTEMBER 2017, ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P1(A) PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE INVOICE NO. 2340 DATED 19TH SEPTEMBER 2017, ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. OR NO. 4/GST/17-18 DATED 20TH SEPTEMBER 2017, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 22ND SEPTEMBER 2017.
EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOSTAT
COPY
OF
THE CGST/SGST/PENALTY
ORDER
NO.
OR 4/GST/2017-18 DATED 23RD SEPTEMBER 2017, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER CGST/SGST ACT ORDER NO. OR 4/GST/2017- 18 DATED 23RD SEPTEMBER 2017, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.