BharatTaxGST

A.P. Steel Re-Roling Mill LTD. vs. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP(C)/14266/2018HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01045854201826 June 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU4 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 14266 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) A.P. STEEL RE-ROLING MILL LTD., VIII/635,PHASE 1,NEW INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, MENONPARA ROAD,KANJIKODE (P.O.), PALAKKAD,REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SENTHIL KUMAR K.R. BY ADVS.SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.R.JAIKRISHNA RESPONDENT(S): 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), SPECIAL CIRCLE,COMMERCIAL TAXES, NOW DESIGNATED AS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES,PALAKKAD-678 001. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,PALAKKAD-678001. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. SHAMSUDHEEN V.K. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 14266 of 2018 (G) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AY-2015-2016 (KVAT). EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT (2015-16). EXHIBIT P2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT (2015-16). EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (2015-16) RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL // True copy // PA to Judge das DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. =========================================== W.P.(C). No. 14266 of 2018(G) ===================================================== Dated this the 26th day of June, 2018

JUDGMENT The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned Ext.P1 assessment order before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition along with the appeal. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3.

I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time his statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

-2- W.P.(C). No. 14266 of 2018(G)

4.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer taking coercive steps until the 2nd respondent considers the stay petition. I also further hope that the 2nd respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE das 27.06.2018

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.