M/S. Edassery Resort vs. State Tax Officer (Intelligence)
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THUR AY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945 WA NO. 136 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT WP(C) 25665/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WP(C): M/S. EDASSERY RESORT KUMALY ROAD, KATTAPANA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI. E J DAVIS, AGED 69., PIN - 685508 BY ADV TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS/rESPONDENT IN WP(C): 1 STATE TAX OFFICER (INTELLIGENCE) SQUAD NO.I, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, IDUKKI AT KATTAPANA., PIN - 685508 2 INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KATTAPANA., PIN - 685508 OTHER PRESENT: SR.GP-V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.136/2024 -:2:- J U D G M E N T Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J.
The appellant, a partnership firm, is a registered dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the KGST Act) conducting a bar-attached hotel under the name and style Edassery Resorts at Kattapana.
The 1st respondent passed Ext.P4 order against the appellant, imposing penalty under Section 45A of the KGST Act. The appellant challenged Ext.P4 before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, relegating the appellant to the statutory appellate remedy before the appellate authority. It is challenging the said judgment of the learned Single Judge; the appellant is before us.
We have heard Sri.Tomson T.Emmanuel, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.V.K.Shamsudheen, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
The appellant challenged Ext.P4 on various factual grounds. The appellant does not have a case that the 1st
WA No.136/2024 -:3:- respondent passed Ext.P4 order without juri iction or it was not heard before passing the order. The disputed question of law cannot be decided in the writ petition. As rightly held by the learned Single Judge, the remedy open to the appellant is to challenge Ext.P4 in appeal before the appellate authority. The time the learned Single Judge granted in the impugned judgment to prefer appeal has expired. Hence, we grant ten more days' time to the appellant to prefer the appeal. If the appeal is instituted within the said period, the appellate authority shall hear and dispose of the same in accordance with law within two months thereafter without going into the question of limitation. The realisation of the penalty shall stand stayed until the disposal of the appeal. The writ appeal is disposed of as above. DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE Rp
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.