Anjiparambil Associates vs. The State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 13 November 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNE AY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 22ND KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.30519 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER/S: ANJIPARAMBIL ASSOCIATES, CC 39/5568, THOUNDAYIL ROAD, MANORAMA JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN, PIN - 682 036, BY ITS PROPRIETOR, VIPIN VINCENT. BY ADVS. SRI.R.MURALEEDHARAN DR.ANIES GEORGE RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, SECOND CIRCLE, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 301. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 015. 3 THE STATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM AT CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682 030. 4 CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, KADAVANTHRA BRANCH, KALLELIL BILDING, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI- 20, REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P(C) No.30519/19 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the recovery steps stated to have been taken by the respondents, pursuant to the expiry of the time limit for the stay granted in Ext.P6 judgment that already directed the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 appeal preferred by the petitioner. It is stated that by Ext.P6 judgment, the 2nd respondent was directed to consider the appeal and stay petition, and that the hearing of the appeal has since been conducted by the 2nd respondent. Unfortunately, the stay granted was to enure only for a period of ten weeks, and the said period has expired. Taking advantage of the said situation, the respondents appear to have initiated coercive steps against the petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents and also the learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I deem it appropriate to dispose the writ petition by clarifying that the stay granted in Ext.P6 judgment shall continue to operate till such time as the 2nd respondent passes orders on Ext.P2 appeal and communicates the order to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition and a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE okb //// P.S. to Judge

W.P(C) No.30519/19 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 23/03/2019. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12/07/2019. EXHIBIT P3OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12/07/2019. EXHIBIT P4OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION TO CONDONE DELAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 05/08/2019. EXHIBIT P5OF R.R.NOTICE SERVED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 27/07/2019. EXHIBIT P6OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.24938/2019 DT. 20/09/2019. EXHIBIT P7OF THE NOTICE SERVED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT POSTING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING, DATED 23/10/2019.