Shiji M R vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Assmt)
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019/26TH ASWINA, 1941 W.P(C).No.27871 OF 2019(H) PETITIONER: SHIJI M.R AGED 34 YEARS PROPRIETRESS, M/S. MRIDUL TIMBERS, VENGINISSERY, PARALAM P.O, THRISSUR-680 001 BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI SHRI. HRITHWIK D. NAMBOOTHIRI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, GOODS SERVICE TAX COMPLEX, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004 3 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004 BY SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.27871/2019 : 2 :
J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the KVAT Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal together with Ext.P3 delay condonation petition as also Ext.P4 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. Ext.P5 is the demand notice. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the stay petition and to keep in abeyance recovery steps, in the meanwhile.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. Taking note of the fact that the delay occassioned in filing the appeal before the 2nd respondent is only 120 days, I deem it appropriate to condone the delay, and dispose the writ petition, by directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass reasoned orders on Ext.P4 stay petition within a period of one month from the date of
W.P.(C).No.27871/2019 : 3 : receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Recovery steps, pursuant to Ext.P5 revenue recovery notice, for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent, as directed, 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 prp/19/10/19
W.P.(C).No.27871/2019 : 4 : APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEARING NO. 32080673924/2005-06 DATED 25.01.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2OF THE 1ST APPEAL DATED 15.10.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION DATED 15.10.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 15.10.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE RRC NO.2019/2658/08 DATED 24.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2005-06. NIL. //// P.S. 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.