Sri Poornachandra & Co vs. The Commercial Tax Officer(Presently State Tax Officer) - Kerala High Court, 09 July 2021

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 13679 OF 2021 PETITIONER/S: SRI POORNACHANDRA & CO 63/1736, 2ND FLOOR, NEAR CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, MAVELI ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-20, REPRESNTED BY ITS MANAGER, P.C BABU BY ADVS. R.MURALEEDHARAN K.P.JOSE PIOUS RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER(PRESENTLY STATE TAX OFFICER) (PRESENTLY STATE TAX OFFICER ), SECOND CIRCLE, KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MINI CIVIL STATION, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 301 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN, PIN- 682 015 3 THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, 6TH FLOOR, TAX COMPLEX, PERUMANOOR, KOCHI,PIN-682 015 4 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM AT CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN-682 030 SMT .THUSHARA JAMES- SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 13679 OF 2021 2

JUDGMENT

Heard both sides.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the appeal challenging Ext.P1 assessment order came to be rejected and the and the petitioner thereafter preferred second appeal alongwith stay petition (Ext.P4) before the 3rd respondent which is pending for adjudication. However, in the meanwhile, the respondents have freezed the bank accounts of the petitioner and also initiated coercive steps to recover the amount covered by the assessment order at Ext.P1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that till disposal of the stay petition in the second appeal filed by the petitioner, coercive action sought to be taken by the respondents needs to be kept in abeyance.

Learned Government Pleader opposed the petition and submitted that at the most, the stay petition may be directed to be considered and decided within a time frame.

Having considered the submissions so advanced and in the WP(C) NO. 13679 OF 2021 3 facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:-

The third respondent is directed to decide the stay petition at Ext.P4 in the pending appeal of the petitioner challenging the assessment order at Ext.P1, within a period of three months from the date of communication of this judgment. The petitioner to co-operate with the 3rd respondent for expeditious disposal of the stay petition. In the meanwhile, the respondents should keep the coercive action for recovery of the amount assessed in pursuant to the assessment order at Ext.P1 in abeyance till disposal of the stay petition. Learned Government pleader is directed to communicate this order to the 3rd respondent for compliance. Parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this judgment. A.M.BADAR JUDGE ajt

WP(C) NO. 13679 OF 2021 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13679/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURE Exhibit P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SEC 25(1) DATED 16.11.2016 Exhibit P2OF THE APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.08.2019 Exhibit P3OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT, DATED 10.12.2019 Exhibit P4OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT, DATED 10.12.2019 Exhibit P5OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER R.R.ACT SERVED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT, DATED 19.01.2017 Exhibit P6OF THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM THE BANK IN RESPECT OF THE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED IN KOCHI BRANCH Exhibit P7OF THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM THE BANK IN RESPECT OF THE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED IN CHENNAI BRANCH