The State Of Kerala vs. Navas Karimbil Aliyar
Original PDF →This review petition is filed by the State aggrieved by certain observations in the impugned judgment. In para 8 of the judgment, it is observed as follows: “Therefore, considering the peculiar nature of the circumstances that brought (SIC) on record like absence of evasion of tax and detection of only an irregularity in the e-way bill, that too in the preparation of the e-way bill, I am of the view that, the goods detained by the respondents are liable to be released on the petitioner paying the entire tax imposed, apart from Rs.10,000/- towards part of penalty imposed under Section 122 of the Act.”
The main grievance of the review petitioners is the observation “absence of evasion of tax”. It was contended that evasion of tax was not a necessary ingredient to initiate proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017. RP NO. 144 OF 2022 3
After having heard Smt.M.M.Jasmine, learned Government Pleader as well as learned counsel for the review petitioners Dr.K.P.Pradeep, I am of the view that the observation “absence of evasion of tax” is an error apparent on the face of the record. The said observation was not warranted in the circumstances of the case, even though, in the order impugned by the original writ petitioner, I could not come across any finding by the State Tax Officer that there was an evasion of tax. In fact, Ext.P14 order proceeded to impose the amounts due under Section 129 is only on account of the existance of two e-way bills. Still, the observation of this Court in the nature of “absence of evasion of tax” in the judgment under review was not required, especially since the review petitioners believe that the said observation may prejudice their cause later.
I find that the said observation is an error apparent on the face of the record and is liable to be deleted. I also notice that no prejudice would be caused to the writ petitioner
RP NO. 144 OF 2022 4 on account of such deletion.
Accordingly, this review petition is allowed by deleting the observation “like absence of evasion of tax” in para 8 of the judgment dated 01.12.2021. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE ssa
RP NO. 144 OF 2022 5 APPENDIX OF R.P. NO.144 OF 2022 PETITIONER EXHIBIT CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 01.12.2021 IN W.P.(C) NO.26960/2021.
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.