Somasundaram Sakthivel vs. The State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 25 March 2022

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 10293 OF 2022 PETITIONER: SOMASUNDARAM SAKTHIVEL, PROPRIETOR, SOMAN STORES, 31/284 E, ABDUL MAJEED BUILDING, NEAR AKSHAYA CENTRE, VETTIKKATTIRI ROAD, NELLIKUTHU P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676122. BY ADV R.MURALEEDHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676121. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM-676121. 3 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM- 676505. OTHER PRESENT: SR. G.P FOR TAXES SMT. TUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 10293 OF 2022 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10293 of 2022 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2022

JUDGMENT The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to consider his representation submitted through e-mail and produced as Ext.P6. 2. Petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act 2003, doing business in pulses, grocery items etc., According to the petitioner, due to a mistake in the invoice uploaded in respect of Interstate Stock Transfers (IN) submitted along with the returns, prejudice is being caused in-relation to the declaration in Form ‘F’. Petitioner contends that, unless the returns submitted for the assessment year 2015-16 are permitted to be revised as sought for in Ext.P6, prejudice would be caused. Though no implication in respect of tax or penalty will arise due to the revision and since no penal proceedings have been initiated till date, there is no harm in permitting revision of returns.

WP(C) NO. 10293 OF 2022 3

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Senior Government Pleader, I am of the view that, since Ext.P6 representation is pending consideration before the 1st respondent this writ petition itself can be disposed of directing an expeditious consideration of Ext.P6. 4.Though petitioner has already preferred Ext.P6, it is preferable that the said representation is replaced by a fresh representation and the petitioner is given the liberty to file a fresh representation in tune with Ext.P6, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If such a representation is filed, within the time stipulated the 1st respondent shall consider the said representation instead of Ext.P6, and dispose of the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM

WP(C) NO. 10293 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10293/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS : Exhibit P1OF THE ANNUAL RETURN FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 06/06/2016. Exhibit P2OF THE LIST OF PURCHASES UPLOADED ALONG WITH THE RETURN SUBMITTED FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, 2015. Exhibit P3OF THE LIST OF PURCHASES UPLOADED ALONG WITH THE RETURN SUBMITTED FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2015. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPIES OF DELIVERY NOTES IN FORM JJ UNDER TAMIL NADU VAT ACT & RULES FOR INTERSTATE STOCK TRANSFERS FROM M/S.SHRI LAKSHMI DHALL MILL, THENI. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPIES OF DELIVERY NOTES IN FORM JJ UNDER TAMIL NADU VAT ACT & RULES FOR INTERSTATE STOCK TRANSFERS FROM M/S. AATHI TRADES, THENI. Exhibit P6OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT SEEKING PERMISSION TO REVISE THE RETURNS, DATED 07/03/2022. RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS : NIL AJM //// PA TO JUDGE