Sri. Ibrahim .P.K vs. The Intelligence Officer- (Ib) - Kerala High Court, 19 March 2018

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 8103 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) SRI. IBRAHIM .P.K., MANAGING PARTNER, AKBAR ELECTRICALS, CHEMMAD, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 106. BY ADVS.SMT.M.K.HAJARA SMT.K.LATHA SRI.C.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER- (IB), O/O THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE, PIN 673020 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE PIN 673 020. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDHAR, CIVIL STATION, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM 676505. R BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8103 of 2018 (K) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.IB IIE/3(A)15-16/E DATED 20.9.2017 UNDER KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT FOR THE YEAR 2013-2014 ALONG WITH IT'S DEMAND NOTICE DATED 20.09.2017 ISSUED BY FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT.P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM NO.29 ALONG WITH GROUNDS OF REVISION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT

AGAINST THE PI PENALTY ORDER EXHIBIT.P3 THEOF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE P2 APPEAL EXHIBIT.P4 THEO THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE IN FORM NO.10 AND FORM NO.1 BOTH DATED 15.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //// P.A. TO JUDGE SKS

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ================== W.P.(C.) No.8103 of 2018 =================== Dated this the 19th day of March, 2018 JUDGMENT

Challenging Ext.P1 order imposing penalty under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the second respondent. Ext.P3 is the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in the appeal. It is stated that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by the order impugned in the appeal. The grievance of the petitioner, in the circumstances, concerns the delay on the part of the appellate authority in deciding the appeal.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as also the orders passed by this Court in similar and identical matters, the writ petition is disposed of directing the appellate authority to consider and pass

W.P.(C).No.8103/2018 2 orders on the application for stay preferred by the petitioner in the appeal, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Needless to say that till orders are passed on the application for stay, further proceedings for realization of the amounts covered by the order impugned in the appeal shall be deferred by the respondents concerned. P.B.SURESH KUMAR

JUDGE SKS