Hotel Sree Visakh vs. The State Of Kerala - 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 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 16TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.3143 OF 2020(P) PETITIONER: HOTEL SREE VISAKH, ITDC JN. KOVALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SOLE PRPRIETOR B. SURENDRA DAS, S/O. LATE BHANU PANICKER. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF SALES TAX, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695001. 3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER II (ASSESSMENT) SPECIAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER (UNDER RR ACT), DEPARTMENT OF SALE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, NEYYATINKARA, PIN-695121. 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. 3143 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.K.B.Pradeep, 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 2nd 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 DATED 27.2.19 FOR JULY 2018. EXHIBIT P2OF THE RETURN FILED FOR JULY 2018 DATED 30.4.2019. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 2.5.2019 AGAINST EXT. P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER. EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 19.12.2019 SUBMITTED IN EXT. P3 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P5OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 6.6.2019.