Uplift Business Corporation vs. The State Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 27TH ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.22199 OF 2020(Y) PETITIONER/S: UPLIFT BUSINESS CORPORATION (NOW M/S.SHARP LIFT AND ESCALATORS) HAMMANIYA REGENCY, 666/13,SHORNUR ROAD THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, GAYAS MUNAVAR BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM SMT.S.K.DEVI RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER KERALA STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, III CIRCLE, GST COMPLEX POOTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680 004 2 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB) [NOW STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) KERALA STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT GST COMPLEX, POOTHOLE THRISSUR - 680004 3 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX KERALA STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT GST COMPLEX, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680004 OTHER PRESENT: GP: DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.22199 OF 2020(Y) 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P3 penalty order and Ext.P5 pre-assessment notice. Although various contentions are raised in this writ petition in its challenge against the said order and notice, I am of the view that against Ext.P3 penalty order, the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy by way of an appeal before the Fist Appellate Authority, and as against Ext.P5 assessment notice, the petitioner has a remedy by way of filing a reply and getting the matter adjudicated before the adjudicating authority. The writ petition impugning either Ext.P3 penalty order or Ext.P5 notice is not maintainable at this stage. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would require some time to move the appellate authority against Ext.P3 penalty order. To enable the petitioner to do this, I direct that the recovery proceedings for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P3 penalty order shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks so as to enable the petitioner to move the appellate authority through a statutory appeal in the meanwhile. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the respondent for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE WP(C).No.22199 OF 2020(Y) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE EXT.P2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.6895 OF 2019 DATED 15.03.2019 EXT.P3 COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.IBD39/14-15(13-14)DATED 15.03.2019 EXT.P4 COPY OF THE INTIMATION NO.IBD 39/14-15 DATED26.03.2019 EXT.P5 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.32080744787/13-14 DATED 18.11.2019 EXT.P6 COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 19.12.2019 EXT.P7 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.32080744787/13-14 DATED 29.09.2020