Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 7062 OF 2023 PETITIONER:
1 CAPE FLOUR MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE AND MILLS: CHUNKANKADI, NAGERCOIL, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU, PIN – 629003 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. L. NATARAJAN BY ADVS.
ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS ISAAC THOMAS JOHN VITHAYATHIL AIBEL MATHEW SIBY ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS SHARAD JOSEPH KODANTHARA RESPONDENTS:
1 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT TAX TOWER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695002 2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX 2ND CIRCLE SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT TAX TOWER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695002 DR. THUSHARA JAMES, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC No.7062 of 2023 2 T.R. RAVI, J.
------------------------------------ W.P.(C.) No.7062 of 2023 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 08th day of March, 2023 JUDGMENT The prayer in the writ petition is for quashing Ext.P8 order and for a direction to the respondents not to implement Ext.P8 order including recovery of any amounts.
2. The petitioner submits that the petitioner had closed the sales depot in Kerala when the GST regime started and this fact had been informed to the respondents. However, even thereafter, it seems that notices have been issued to the address where the petitioner was earlier doing business and the said notices were returned ‘unclaimed’. The assessment orders have been issued thereafter. The case of the petitioner is that the assessment has been carried without notice to the petitioner.
3. The Government Pleader on instructions submitted
WPC No.7062 of 2023 3 that the notice has returned ‘unclaimed’ in November, 2022 prior to the issuance of Ext.P8 .
4. Having gone through the materials on record and on reading of the assessment order, it is clear that the petitioner has not been given an opportunity to represent their case. As a matter of fact, the petitioner has stopped their business and going by the documents that is produced it cannot be said that the petitioner has not intimated the Department about the shifting of their premises.
In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that an opportunity should be given to the petitioner for making their submissions prior to finalising the assessment. The writ petition is hence allowed. Ext.P8 is set aside. The respondent shall complete the assessment after issuing notice to the petitioner in their present address as evident from the writ petition.
Sd/- T.R.RAVI JUDGE SKP/08-03
WPC No.7062 of 2023 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7062/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF THE STATUS REPORT GENERATED FROM THE GST WEBSITE EVIDENCING THE CANCELLATION OF THE PROVISIONAL LD.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE GST WEBSITE CONFIRMING CANCELLATION OF THE PROVISIONAL LD.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13-4- 2018 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER - ILL, SGST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 17-04-2018 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER - ILL, SGST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 21-12-2020 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE CGST DEPARTMENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 21-12-2020 FROM THE CGST DEPARTMENT TO THE PETITIONER ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P5 EMAIL EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 09-01- 2023 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06-12-2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND SIGNED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE