M.C.Vijayakumar vs. The Deputy Commissioner
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1942 WP(C).No.13206 OF 2020(A) PETITIONER/S: M.C.VIJAYAKUMAR, VIMALALAYAM, S.E.THAZHAVA, SRP MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-690 539. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXICSE, KOLLAM DIVISION, ST.MARYS BUILDING, KADAPPAKADA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 008. 2 THE SUPERINTENDENT (PREV) O/O THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, KOLLAM DIVISION, VARINJAM TOWERS, RESIDENCY ROAD, KOLLAM, PIN-691 001. 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, KARUNAGAPALLY RANGE, IST FLOOR, SIVAM, EAST OF KSRTC BUS STAND, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690518. 4 THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT (REVENUE), CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, PIN-110 001. R1-3 BY SREELAL N. WARRIER, SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS R4 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).No.13206 of 2020 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court impugning Ext.P12 order of the 1st respondent confirming a demand of service tax and penalty by invoking the larger period of limitation under the Finance Act, 1994 as amended as applicable to service tax.
I have heard Sri.Bobby John, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sreelal N.Warrier, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents 1 to 3. 3. Although various contentions are raised in the Writ Petition in its challenge against Ext.P12 order, including a contention that that there was no justification for invoking the larger period of limitation as against the petitioner, I find that Ext.P12 order is not vitiated by any juri ictional error in that the order contains reasons as to why the department was of the view that the larger period of limitation could be invoked as against the petitioner. In particular, it is found that the petitioner, who was required to take a registration and pay tax for a certain period did not do so and to that extent suppressed the actual tax payable by him during the return period. At any rate, inasmuch as the issue canvassed by the petitioner in the Writ Petition would require a
W.P(C).No.13206 of 2020 3 detailed examination of facts, he writ court is not the appropriate forum for agitating the said contention. Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the appellate authority in its challenge against Ext.P12 order, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
Taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he would require some time to file an appeal, I direct that recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P12 order shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks so as to enable the petitioner to move the appellate authority, in the meanwhile. The Writ Petition is disposed as above. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE mns
W.P(C).No.13206 of 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE LETTER DATED 7.1.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2OF THE LETTER DATED 4.3.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3OF THE REPLY DATED 19.3.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4OF THE LETTER DATED 30.3.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5OF THE REPLY DATED 3.6.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6OF THE LETTER DATED 2.9.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P7OF THE REPLY DATED 29.10.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8OF THE LETTER DATED 12.6.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 20.6.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P10OF THE REPLY DATED 24.6.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11OF THE POSTING NOTICE DATED 28.1.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P12OF THE ORDER DATED 28.2.2020 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P13OF THE LETTER DATED 18.6.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE
W.P(C).No.13206 of 2020 5 PETITIONER. 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.