M/S.Power Link Builders(P)LTD. vs. State Tax Officer(Ib)-1
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1941 WP(C).No.19212 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: M/S.POWER LINK BUILDERS(P)LTD., G3, AISWARYA, JAAWHAR NAGAR, KAWDIAR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003, REPRESENTED BY MG. DIRECTOR P. PRADEEP. BY ADVS. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN SRI.V.JAYANANDAKUMAR RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE TAX OFFICER(IB)-1 STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 0002. 2 THE DPEUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 002. 3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 121. 4 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. GP. SMT. M.M. JASMIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2- WP(C).No.19212 of 2019 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the order of penalty in Ext.P1 made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeal with a stay petition in Ext.P3. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Ext.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 Ext.P3 results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Ext.P2. 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 is passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.
Perused Exts. P1, P2 and P3. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2nd respondent to
-3- WP(C).No.19212 of 2019 dispose of the stay petition in Ext.P3. 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 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 JUDGE JS
-4- WP(C).No.19212 of 2019 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO. CR 28/15-16 (14-15/B2/IO(IB)II/TVM DATED 20/4/2019 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 17/5/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P1 ORDER. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 17/5/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXT. P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE NO. B3/1794/2019 DATED 25/6/2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
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.