Sreepathi Indraprastha vs. The State Tax Officer-Ii
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 23RD MAGHA,1942 WP(C).No.3732 OF 2021(N) PETITIONER: SREEPATHI INDRAPRASTHA SREEPATHI KAILASAM , XV 16/7 (SA 7), MAMMIYOOR, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SUNDER BHASKARAN. BY ADVS. SRI.R.MURALEEDHARAN DR.ANIES GEORGE RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER-II STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 506. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TAX COMPLEX, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 004. 3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX STATE GST DEPARTMENT, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 125. GP-- THUSHARA JAMES . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.3732 OF 2021(N) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 12th day of February 2021 Heard both sides.
Ext.P1 assessment order is under challenge in a statutory appeal pending before the 2nd respondent. The stay petition in the appeal is also pending along with an application for condonation of delay. According to the petitioner, because of financial crunch and initiation of recovery proceedings by the financial institutions, the petitioner could not file returns despite Ext.P1 assessment order which was passed on the basis of best judgment. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, subsequently he has filed the returns covering the period from September 2019 to March 2020 apart from payment of entire tax as well as interest thereon. Simultaneously he has also challenged the assessment order at Ext.P1 which is pending adjudication before the 2nd respondent in the appeal. The limited prayer of the petitioner by this petition is to stay the revenue recovery proceedings initiated by respondent No. 3, Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax which is evident from the communication at Ext.P6. 3. The learned Government Pleader opposed this petition.
Having considered the submissions made at the bar and
WP(C).No.3732 OF 2021(N) 3 keeping in mind, the fact situation which has arisen in the instant case, as the statutory appeal along with stay petitions and application for condonation of delay is pending on the files of the 2nd respondent, the revenue recovery proceedings should not be continued, atleast till disposal of the stay petition. Therefore the order. The Revenue Recovery proceedings initiated by demand notice, Ext.P6 shall be kept in abeyance till disposal of the stay petition in the statutory appeal by the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent is directed to decide the pending application including the stay petition in the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of the judgment. The petitioner shall cooperate with the 2nd respondent in disposing the stay petition and the pending applications if any. A.M.BADAR N //// PA to Judge JUDGE
WP(C).No.3732 OF 2021(N) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER KGST ACT, FOR THE YEAR 2019-2020, DATED 30.09.2020. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPIES OF THE RECEIPTS FOR E-PAYMENT OF TAX ON FILING OF RETURNS FOR THE MONTHS OF SEPT. 2019 TO MAR. 2020 DATED 16.11.2020 AND 03.02.2020. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT. P1 ORDER, DATED 04.02.2021. EXHIBIT P4OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION TO CONDONE DELAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 04.02.2021. EXHIBIT P5OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 04.02.2021. EXHIBIT P6OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED UNDER RR ACT, BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29.01.2021.
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.