M/S.Master Aluminium Technology vs. The State Tax Officer (Wc)
Original PDF →wIN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI TUE AY, THE 09TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1941 WP(C).No.18583 of 2019 PETITIONER: M/S.MASTER ALUMINIUM TECHNOLOGY OPP. SELVAN AUDITORIUM, VADAKKANCHERRY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY M.SUKUMARAN, MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WC) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD-678001. 2 KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL. BENCH, CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673032, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. SECRETARY. 3 BANK OF BARODA, VADAKKENCHERRY BRANCH, PALAKKAD-678683, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES., SC SMT. REMA R THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.18583 of 2019 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeals in Exts.P3 and P3(a) aggrieved by the modified orders of assessment in Exts.P2 and P2 (a) made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeals with a delay condonation petitions of 85 days in Exts.P5 and P5 (a) and Exts.P6 and P6 (a) stay petitions. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P5 and P5 (a) and Exts.P6 and P6 (a) 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.P5 and P5 (a) and Exts.P6 and P6 (a) results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Exts.P3 and P3(a) appeals. 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 appeals, the orders on delay petition and stay petition are passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.
WP(C).No.18583 of 2019 3
Perused Exts.P2 and P2(a) modified assessment order, Exts.P3 and P3(a) appeals, Exts.P5 and P5 (a) delay petitions and Exts.P6 and P6 (a) stay petitions. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2nd respondent to dispose of the delay condonation petitions and stay petitions in Exts.P5 and P5 (a) and Exts.P6 and P6 (a) respectively. 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 Exts.P5 and P5 (a) delay petitions and Exts.P6 and P6 (a) stay applications 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 nak JUDGE
WP(C).No.18583 of 2019 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 30.06.2017. EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 30.06.2017. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), PALAKKAD FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 16.01.2018. EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), PALAKKAD FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 11.01.2018. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN TA (VAT) NO.919/18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26.04.2018. EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN TA (VAT) NO.920/18 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.04.2018. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.05.2019. EXHIBIT P4 A COPY OF CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.05.2019. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.05.2019. EXHIBIT P5 A COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.05.2019. WP(C).No.18583 of 2019 5 EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.06.2019. EXHIBIT P6 A COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28.06.2019. //// P.A. 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.