P.Muhammed vs. The State Tax Officer (Wc)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL TUE AY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 29TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.4517 OF 2020(L) PETITIONER/S: P.MUHAMMED AGED 54 YEARS KANANGATTUKUZHIYIL HOUSE, OLAKARA, KOOMANNA, MALAPPURAM-676306 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR P.MUHAMMED BY ADV. SMT.M.K.HAJARA RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WC) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MALLAPPURAM-676505 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES-S.G.ST. DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE- 673001 3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI 676121 OTHER PRESENT: DR THUSHARA JAMES,GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.4517 OF 2020(L) 2 JUDGMENT Dated this the 18th day of February 2020
As against Ext.P1 order for the assessment year 2015-16 under the Kerala value Added Tax Act, petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay application and Ext.P4 application to condone the delay in filing Ext.P2 appeal. The case of the petitioner is that, the 3rd respondent is proceeding further with the revenue recovery prior to considering the stay petition, which impelled the petitioner to approach this Court.
This Court in W.P.(C) No.3800/2020 had passed a detailed order after having called the Assistant Commissioner of Law in court with regard to the numbering of appeal and hearing of the stay application. Several writ petitions are pending in this Court seeking redressal of grievance for non-hearing of the appeal, along with stay applications.
This writ petition is also of the similar nature and the petitioner is in dilemma. In such circumstances, this Court cannot sit as a mute spectator without coming to the rescue of such litigants.
WP(C).No.4517 OF 2020(L) 3 4. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the appellate authority to consider Ext.P4 application to condone the delay in filing Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 application of stay within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment as the petitioner in such circumstances had not opted for automatic stay in view of the amended provisions of Section 55 (4) of KVAT Act, 2003. Steps for recovery of amounts pertaining to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance, till such time the stay application is disposed of. It is made clear that the interim arrangement is only till the adjudication of the stay application. However, this will not stand in the way of the appellate authority deciding the appeal along with the stay application. AMIT RAWAL shg JUDGE
WP(C).No.4517 OF 2020(L) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR 2015-16 DATED 26.04.2019 EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE APPEAL FILED DATED 07.02.2020 AGAINST EXT.P1 EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED ALONG WITH P2 APPEAL EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED ALONG WITH P2 APPEAL EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 25.09.2019
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.