A.Narayanan vs. The State Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 22ND ASWINA, 1941 WP(C).No.26712 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER: A.NARAYANAN PROPRIETOR, SHYAMA TRADERS, KANKOLE, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL SRI.SAJU.K.PERUTTY RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670002. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, SAPHIRE RESTAURANT BUILDING, SOUTH BAZAAR, KANNUR-670002. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.26712 OF 2019(L) 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the recovery steps initiated by the respondents at a time when the 2nd respondent, before whom appeals and stay petitions preferred by the petitioner, against an order of assessment for the assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, are pending consideration. The facts in the Writ Petition would indicate that by Ext.P4 judgment this Court had directed the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the stay petitions within two months and had also stayed the recovery steps for a period of two months. The 2nd respondent however did not consider the stay applications within two months as directed and the stay against the recovery steps had expired within the said period of two months and consequently the respondents took advantage of the expiry of the stay granted by this Court and initiated recovery proceedings against the petitioner.

WP(C).No.26712 OF 2019(L) 3 On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, and taking note of the intention of this Court in Ext.P4 judgment that the recovery proceedings had to be stayed till such time as orders were passed by the 2nd respondent in the stay applications, I direct that the stay granted by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment shall continue till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent in the stay applications as directed and the orders communicated to the petitioner. Taking note of the fact that the time granted in Ext.P4 judgment for disposal of the stay applications has since expired, I direct that the 2nd respondent shall pass orders in the stay applications within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE mns

WP(C).No.26712 OF 2019(L) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 15.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1. EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1 (A). EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2(A) APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 12.04.2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.11955 OF 2019. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF POSTING NOTICE DATED 29.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF ADJOURNMENT PETITION DATED 17.09.19 FILED BY THE PETITIONER'S COUNSEL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //// P.A TO JUDGE