Ncc LTD vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 11TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.23750 OF 2019(P) PETITIONER: M/S NCC LTD, DOOR NO.CC 44/1725A, KALOOR, PARENDOOR ROAD, LFC ROAD, COCHIN, 682 017, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER MR. VINOD KUMAR. BY ADVS. SMT.K.LATHA SMT.JESSY MANUEL RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, WORKS CONTRACT AND LUXURY TAX, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, GST DEPARTMENT, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682019. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682019. 3 THE STATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM AT CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD - 682030. DR. THUSHARA JAMES, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.23750 OF 2019 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Ext.P1 made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeal with Ext.P3 stay petition. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P3 expeditiously.
The case of petitioner is that either the mere filing of appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount to granting stay by the appellate authority. The delay in considering and disposing of Exts.P3 application for stay results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Ext.P2 appeal. The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeal would become either academic or ineffective. It is further contended by the petitioner that in the manner the law provides for protecting the interest of appellant pending appeal, the order on stay petition be passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.
Perused Exts. P1 to P3 . Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2nd respondent to
WP(C).No.23750 OF 2019 3 dispose of the stay petition in Exts.P3 expeditiously. Having regard to the limited prayer and the grounds referred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by this order: (a) The appellate authority/2nd respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P3 application for stay as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. (b) The respondents are directed not to take coercive steps or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from today. S.V.BHATTI sru JUDGE
WP(C).No.23750 OF 2019 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2012-2013 DATED 26.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 THEOF THE APPEAL IN FORM NO.29 ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE EXT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXHIBIT P3 THEOF STAY PETITION FILED IN THE EXT P2 APPEALS. EXHIBIT P4 THEOF REVENUE NOTICE DATED 04/07/2019 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER BASED ON THE EXT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2012-2013. RESPONDENTB'S EXHIBITS:NIL
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.