S.Chandrasekharan Nair vs. The State Tax Officer (Works Contract)
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 22ND BHADRA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 18686 OF 2021 PETITIONER: S.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR PROPRIETOR, M/S.JYOTHIS, T.C.4/61, MUTTADA ROAD, AMBALAMUKKU, KAWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. BY ADV.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) ADV.RAHUL A. ADV.APARNA ANIL RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN CODE-695002. 2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN CODE-695002. SMT. JASMINE M.M., GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.18686/21 -:2:- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. --------------------------------- W.P.(C). No.18686 of 2021 --------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of September, 2021 JUDGMENT Petitioner was a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. By Ext.P1 assessment order issued by the 1st respondent for the assessment year 2016-17, an order demanding payment of tax and interest as specified in Ext.P1(a) was imposed against the petitioner. Challenging the order of assessment, petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent along with Ext.P3 stay petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of Ext.P3 stay petition, respondents are initiating coercive steps and hence it is essential that the stay petition filed by the petitioner be considered in a time bound manner.
I have heard Adv.S.Anil Kumar, the learned counsel on behalf of petitioner as well as Adv.M.M.Jasmin, the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents.
Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I deem
W.P.(C) No.18686/21 -:3:- it fit that Ext.P3 stay petition filed by the petitioner be directed to be disposed of in a time bound manner.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 stay petition filed by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then, all coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1(a) shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps
W.P.(C) No.18686/21 -:4:- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18686/2021 PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17. EXHIBIT P1(a) COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF EXT.P1 ORDER. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL.
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.