Udayakumar D vs. The State Commissioner Of State Goods And Service Tax Department - Kerala High Court, 05 February 2020

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 16TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.3050 OF 2020(E) PETITIONER: UDAYAKUMAR D., PROPRIETOR, 'M/S.AMRUTHA ASSOCIATES', PUTHUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA, TAX TOWER, KILLIPPALAM, KARAMANA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695002. 2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KOTTARAKKARA, PIN-691506. 3 THE KERALA STATE VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695010. 4 THE TAHSILDAR, KOTTARAKKARA, MINI CIVIL STATION, KOTTARAKKARA, PIN-691506. SMT.M.M.JASMINE, GOVT.PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 3050 of 2020 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of February, 2020

J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P-1 order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P-3 appeal and Ext.P-4 stay petition. The petitioner's grievance is that during the pendency of the stay petition, coercive recovery proceedings have been initiated by the assessing authority for recovery of the disputed amounts.

Heard Sri.Bobby John Pulickaparambil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.M.M.Jasmine, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the 3rd respondent shall take up the matters in Ext.P-4 stay application filed in Ext.P-3 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through authorised representative/counsel, if any, shall pass orders without much delay, preferably within a period of six weeks from ..3.. the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Until orders are thus passed on the abovesaid stay application, further coercive steps for enforcement of the impugned order will be kept in abeyance. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE MMG ..4.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16, DATED 19.3.2018, PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, UNDER SEC. 24 OF THE KVAT ACT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER FOR THE YEAR

2015-16,

DATED 29.12.2018, PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

(APPEALS),

SGST DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM. EXHIBIT P3OF THE SECOND APPEAL FOR THE YEAR 2015-16, DATED 28.12.2019, FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY APPLICATION FOR THE YEAR 2015-16, DATED 26.12.2019, FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.