K.K.Purushothaman vs. The Commercial Tax Officer I - Kerala High Court, 11 May 2018

Heard together (2 matters)

WA.No. 950 of 2018

WP(C) 11176/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MAY 2018 / 21ST VAISAKHA, 1940 WA.No. 950 of 2018 IN WPC. 11176/2018 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 11176/2018 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 12-04-2018 APPELLANT/PETITIONER K.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN, GREEN POINT INTERIORS, ENGANDIYOOR-680615, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV.SRI.P.JINISH PAUL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER-I, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHAVAKKAD-680506, THRISSUR DIST. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GST DEPARTMENT, THRISSUR-680001. 3. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR-680506. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. RAJI T. BHASKAR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-05-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & SHIRCY V.,JJ. ============================== W.A. No. 950 of 2018 ============================== Dated this the 11th day of May, 2018

JUDGMENT A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar,J. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 12.4.2018, which dismissed the writ petition filed against Exts.P9 and P10 orders passed against the writ petitioner under Section 60 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. It is seen that Exts. P9 and P10 are orders passed by the first appellate authority under the K.G.S.T.Act for the assessment years 2003-2004 and 2004- 2005 respectively. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the appellate authority did not consider any of the grounds raised by the appellant in the appeal before the appellate authority, and that the appellate order was laconic and bereft of any reasoning. The learned single Judge found that Exts.P9 and P10 orders are appealable orders under the K.G.S.T.Act and hence refused to entertain the writ petition and dismissed the same on the ground that there is alternative remedy available to the petitioner.

We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances, we find that it has all along been the contention of the appellant that the first appellate orders, that are impugned in the writ petition, do not contain the reasons that weighed with the first appellate authority while dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant. We are of the view that an order passed without reasons cannot be said to be a valid order, more so when, in the appeal preferred before the first appellate authority, the assessee had raised specific contentions and the order of the appellate authority does not advert to any of the said contentions. Accordingly, we allow the Writ Appeal by quashing Exts.P9 and P10 orders of the first appellate authority and directing the said authority to pass fresh orders in the matter after hearing the appellant and after adverting to the grounds raised in the appeal preferred by the appellant before the appellate authority. To enable the appellate authority to do so, we direct the appellant to appear before the appellate authority at his office at 11 a.m.on 24.05.2018. The appellate authority shall pass fresh orders as directed within three weeks thereafter. Needless to say, the recovery proceedings initiated against the appellant pursuant to Ext.P11 recovery notice shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed by the appellate authority as directed above and communicated to the appellant. A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE SHIRCY V. JUDGE ks.P.S. To Judge