Sobha LTD. vs. The Assistant State Tax Officer

WP(C)/26355/2022HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01055687202226 August 2022Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

For Petitioner: RAHUL A., S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM), SABU C.J, M.RAJAGOPAL, APARNA ANIL

AI SummaryAllowed

Held

The Court directed the respondent to complete the proceedings initiated under Section 129 of the CGST/SGST Acts within two weeks. This must be done after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and considering any material produced.

Facts

The petitioner, a registered dealer, challenged the undue delay by the respondent in concluding proceedings initiated under Section 129 of the CGST/SGST Acts. The petitioner had submitted a reply to a physical verification notice, but the respondent claimed the petitioner needed to take temporary registration and upload replies online, which the petitioner disputed.

Key Issues

The key legal issue was the delay in concluding proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST/SGST Acts. There was also a dispute regarding the proper procedure for submitting replies and documents (online portal vs. temporary registration).

Sections Cited

Section 129

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 26355 OF 2022 PETITIONER: SOBHA LTD., 9/575/4, III, VAZHAPILY TOWER, BEHIND HEAD POST OFFICE, SAKTHAN NAGAR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, V.G.VENUGOPAL. BY ADVS. RAHUL A. S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SABU C.J M.RAJAGOPAL APARNA ANIL RESPONDENT: THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, SQUAD NO.1, KERALA STATE GST DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OFF THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (INTELLIGENCE), PALAKKAD-678 001. ADV. JASMIN M M (GP) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 26355 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 129 of the CGST / SGST Acts has not been concluded despite the fact that the petitioner has given Ext.P5 reply in response to Ext.P4 notice for physical verification. It is submitted that proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST / SGST Act are to be concluded within a

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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.