BharatTaxGST

Vizag Exports vs. The Deputy Commissioner (Assessment)

Original PDF →
WP(C)/9390/2021HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01025437202117 September 2021Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 9390 OF 2021 PETITIONER: M/S.VIZAG EXPORTS, MANGAD, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, ABHAYA MOHANAN. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM-691 001. 2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM-691 001. 3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS LAW SECRETARY, LAW (G) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 SRI.JOSEPH JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 9390 OF 2021 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J =========================== W.P.(C) No.9390 of 2021 --------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2021

JUDGMENT

Petitioner is an assesseee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Faced with Ext.P1 assessment order for the assessment year 2014-2015, petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal before theh 2nd respondent.

2.

Now the petitioner complains that the appellate authority, instead of numbering the appeal, has kept the appeal aside as defective and issued Ext.P3 notice alleging that the petitioner has not deposited 1% of the disputed tax as court fee due to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund and also cautioned that the appeal will be rejected for default, if the said amount is not deposited.

3.

According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner needs to pay only 0.5% of the disputed amount

WP(C) NO. 9390 OF 2021 3 because of the relevant notification and the judgment of this Court in O.P.(Tax) No.2/2017. 4. I have heard Adv.Harisankar V.Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel, and have also perused the records.

5.

It is true that the statute now mandates the amount to be paid to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund as 1% of the disputed tax amount, by virtue of the amendment dated 07.04.2016. This Court has held, through series of judgments, that the amendment is prospective.

6.

In view of the judgment in O.P.(Tax) No.2/2017, it will suffice if the petitioner remits 0.5% of the disputed tax to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund and also furnishes a personal bond without sureties before the Assessing Authority undertaking to pay the balance amount due under the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund, if the issue is ultimately found against the petitioner. On furnishing the bond as directed above and on payment of 0.5% of WP(C) NO. 9390 OF 2021 4 the disputed tax to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund (if not already paid) within four weeks from today, the appellate authority shall number the appeal and consider the same on merits, in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/20/09//2021

WP(C) NO. 9390 OF 2021 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9390/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 14.8.2020. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 17.2.2021. EXHIBIT P3 DEFECT NOTICE IS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.2.2021. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF NOTIFICATION IS ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 7.4.2016. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.27245/19 DATED 15.10.2019. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL //// PA TO JUDGE

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.