A.N.Sankaran vs. State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 22 November 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.31705 OF 2019 PETITIONER: A.N.SANKARAN AGED 51 YEARS GOLD SMITH, IYYAPATH HOUE, THIRUVALLUKKAVU, CHERPU P.O., THRISSUR-680 561. BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE TAX OFFICER FORMERLY INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.II, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMPLEX, PUTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004. 2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMPLEX, PUTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004. 3 STATE TAX OFFICER 2ND CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMPLEX, PUTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.M.JASMINE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.31705 OF 2019 2 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 penalty order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal, Ext.P3 delay condonation petition together with Ext.P4 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Ext.P1 penalty order.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Taking note of the fact that the delay occasioned in filing the appeal before the 2nd respondent is only 380 days, which was occasioned on account of the pendency of the Writ Petition challenging the constitutional validity of the savings clause under the GST Act, I deem it appropriate to condone the same and direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass reasoned orders on Ext.P4 stay petition within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 penalty order shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as

WP(C).No.31705 OF 2019 3 directed above and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE mns

WP(C).No.31705 OF 2019 4 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER DATED 20.3.2018 COMMUNICATED TO PETITIONER BY IST RESPONDENT, IMPOSING PENALTY U/S.67(1) TO KVAT ACT FOR 2016-17, IN ESTIMATING SALES SUPPRESSION. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL DATED 15.5.2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P1 PENALTY. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF PETITION DATED 15.5.2019 FOR CONDONING DELAY, SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 15.5.2019, SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 11.1.2019 ISSUED TO PETITIONER BY 3RD RESPONDENT, ON THE BASIS OF EXT P1 PENALTY IMPOSED BY IST RESPONDENT, FOR COMPLETING BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT FOR 2016-17. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 16.11.2019 IN WP(C) NO.31054 OF 2019 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT, ON SIMILAR SET OF FACT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //// P.A TO JUDGE