Josgold vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax (Int)
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1942 WP(C).No.23398 OF 2020(Y) PETITIONER: M/S JOSGOLD KALARICKAL BAZAR, CENTRAL JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.BABU M.PHILIP BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SMTG.MINI(1748) SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD SHRI.JOB ABRAHAM SRI.AJAY V.ANAND RESPONDENTS: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (INT) SQUAD NO.1, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001 2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE KOTTAYAM DIVISION SRINIVASA IYER ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.23398 OF 2020(Y) 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P10 show cause notice issued to him under Section 74 of the GST Act. Although various contentions are raised in the writ petition in its challenge against the show cause notice, I am of the view that since Ext.P10 is only a show cause notice, against which the petitioner has an effective right to prefer an objection and get the matter adjudicated before the adjudicating authority, an interference with the show cause notice at this stage, even assuming that the contention is one regarding absence of juri iction, is not warranted in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
I note that in response to Ext.P10 show cause notice, the petitioner has already filed a detailed objection through Ext.P12, wherein he has raised various contentions including the propriety of issuing the show cause notice, as also juri ictional aspects. It is the contention of the petitioner that these ought to be considered by the adjudicating authority while passing an order on the proceedings initiated through Ext.P10 show cause notice.
Taking note of the said submission of the learned counsel for the
WP(C).No.23398 OF 2020(Y) 3 petitioner, while dismissing the Writ Petition in its challenge against Ext.P10 show cause notice, I make it clear that the 1st respondent shall, while passing orders in the proceedings initiated by Ext.P10 show cause notice, consider the objections raised by the petitioner in Ext.P12, as also other objections raised at the time of hearing, and the order to be passed by him shall reflect a consideration of those objections. The 1st respondent shall pass orders in the matter within an outer time limit of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE mns
WP(C).No.23398 OF 2020(Y) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE SMITH ISSUE/RECEIPT REGISTER PARTY WISE (3 PERSONS) EXHIBIT P2OF THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD 1/4/2019 TO 12/12/2019 EXHIBIT P3OF THE HALL MARKING/BIS LEDGER INDICATING GOODS SENT FOR HALL MARKING. EXHIBIT P4OF THE REFINING AND MELTING (PARTY SIGR) LEDGER INDICATING GOODS SENT FOR MELTING. EXHIBIT P5OF FORM 14 A EXTRACT FOR THE PERIOD 1/4/2019 TO 10/4/2019 AND 1/12/2019 TO 12/12/2019 EXHIBIT P6OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 12/12/2019 EXHIBIT P7OF THE SEIZURE ORDER DATED 12/12/2019 EXHIBIT P8OF THE COMMUNICATION IN FORM GST DRC-01A DATED 24/8/2019 EXHIBIT P9OF THE REPLY DATED 14/9/2020 EXHIBIT P10OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 24/9/2020 EXHIBIT P11 A COPY OF THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT EXHIBIT P12OF THE REPLY DATED 23/10/2020 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //// P.A TO JUDGE
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.