Razack A.H vs. The State Of Kerala
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU MONDAY ,THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 1ST MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 114 of 2019 PETITIONER: RAZACK A.H,AGED 47 YEARS S/O.HAMEED, ARAKKAL HOUSE KONAM ROAD, PALLURUTHY P.O. KOCHI - 682 006. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.PRADEEP SMT.ANJANA KANNATH SMT.NEENA ARIMBOOR SRI.SANAND RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.T.T.BIJU RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2 STATE TAX OFFICER/COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER MATTANCHERY, KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, BAZAR ROAD, MATTANCHERY, ERNAKULAM - 682 002. 3 COMMISSIONER OF KERALA STATE GST KERALA STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS KILLIPALAM, KARAMANA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 002. 4 GOODS AND SERVICE TAX COUNCIL GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, OFFICE OF THE GST COUNCIL SECRETARIAT, 5TH FLOOR, TOWER II, JEEVAN BHARTI BUILDING, JANPATH ROAD, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI - 110 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL SECRETARY. GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES CGC SRI.P. VIJAYAKUMAR SR. SC SRI SREELAL WARRIER. SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS SRI.R.HARISHANKAR ADDL AG SRI. K.K. RAVINDRANATH SPL.G.P. SRI. C.E. UNNIKRISHNAN ADDL SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI. K.M. NATRAJ
WP(C).No. 114 of 2019 2 CGC SRI.JAISHANKAR V. NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 114 of 2019 3 JUDGMENT In this writ petition the petitioner has approached this Court with the following reliefs: “(i) To declare that the provisions of Section 174(2) of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, most particularly the provisions in Section 174(2)(e) therein, to the extent of permitting continuation of proceedings under Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is ultravires to the constitution and hence unconstitutional. (ii) To call for the records leading to Ext.P2 notice and to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to quash Ext.P2 notice issued by the 2nd respondent. (iii) Direct the respondents to pay cost of this proceedings.”
The learned counsel agree that the issue stands squarely covered against the petitioner by judgment dated 11th January 2019 in W.P.(C) No.11335 of 2018 and connected cases. I, therefore, dismiss the writ petition applying the ratio of the judgment referred to above. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE WP(C).No. 114 of 2019 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
: EXHIBIT P1OF THE NOTICE ON OR 560/V/12-13 DATED 17/10/2012 ISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR, SQUAD NO.V, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P2OF THE NOTICE NO.,OR-560/12-13 DATED 13/12/2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3OF THE ORDER NO.OR-560/V/12-13 DATED 19/05/2017 ISSUED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (INTERNAL AUDIT), ALUVA.
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.