Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MAY 2018 / 21ST VAISAKHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 15622 of 2018
PETITIONER(S)
------------
M/S. BUILDERS HOUSE,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690 518, REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. NASAR AHAMMED.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI
SRI.P.UNNIKRISHNAN (THRISSUR)
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE STATE TAX OFFICER-II,
STATE GST DEPARTMENT, KARUNAGAPPALLY-690 518.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS)-II,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM-690 001.
3. THE VAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM - 690 001.
BY SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-05-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 15622 of 2018 ©
------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER
NO.32020991392/2013-14 DATED 30.09.2016 FOR THE YEAR
2013-14 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN RECEIPT DATED 17.01.2017
REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2013-14.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER NO.
KVATA(KLM)1125/2016 DATED 29.11.2017 PASSED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR
2013-14.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF 2ND APPEAL DATED 09.04.2018 FOR THE
YEAR 2013-14 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 09.04.2018
FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)'EXHIBITS - NIL
-----------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
TS
14.05.2018
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.15622 of 2018
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of May, 2018
JUDGMENT The petitioner herein was issued with assessment order for the year 2013-2014. Challenging it, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 appeal along with Ext.P5 stay petition. It is stated by the petitioner that the stay petition has not been taken up and orders have not been passed till now. However, the apprehension of the petitioner is that the authorities are proceeding with the enforcement of order of the assessment authority. In the light of the above, there will be a direction to dispose of Ext.P5 stay petition, at the earliest. Till orders are passed on Ext.P5, there will be an interim stay of recovery of the amounts claimed. The writ petition is disposed of. SUNIL THOMAS,
JUDGE. //// P.A. To Judge sp/11/05/18
