BharatTaxGST

S.Chandrasekharan Nair vs. The State Tax Officer (Works Contract)

Original PDF →
WP(C)/19426/2020HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01048885202022 September 2020Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages
For Respondent: G.P. DR THUSHARA JAMES

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 31ST BHADRA, 1942 WP(C).No.19426 OF 2020 PETITIONER/S: S.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR PROPRIETOR, M/S.JYOTHIS TC 4/61, MUTTADA ROAD, AMBALAMUKKU KAWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695003 BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SHRI.RAHUL A. RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, TAX TOWERS KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695002 2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695002 OTHER PRESENT: G.P. DR THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.19426 OF 2020 2

JUDGMENT Against Exts.P3 and P3(a) modified assessment orders under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P4 and P4(a) appeals together with Exts.P5 and P5(a) delay condonation applications and Exts.P6 and P6(a) stay petitions before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petitions, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Exts.P3 and P3(a) modified assessment orders.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

1.

Taking note of the fact that the delay occasioned is only 144 days, I deem it appropriate to condone the delay and direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass reasoned orders on Exts.P6 and P6(a) stay petitions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P3 and P3(a) modified assessment

WP(C).No.19426 OF 2020 3 orders shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above and orders communicated to the petitioner.

3.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE WP(C).No.19426 OF 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16.11.2016 FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 25(1) EXT.P1(a) COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DATED 16.11.2016 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 5(1) EXT.P2 COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 25.05.2018 ISSUED BY THE DY.COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXT.P3 COPY OF THE MODIFIED ORDER DATED 31.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXT.P3(a) COPY OF THE MODIFIED ORDER DATED 31.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 EXT.P4 COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P3 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4(a) COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P3(a) FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE PETITION FOR CONDONING DELAY IN FILING APPEAL FILED IN EXT.P4 APPEAL EXT.P5(a) COPY OF THE PETITION FOR CONDONING DELAY IN FILING APPEAL FILED IN EXT.P4(a) APPEAL EXT.P6 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P4 APPEAL EXT.P6(a) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P4(a) APPEAL

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.