Electro Plaza Agencies vs. The Commercial Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 27 January 2020

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 7TH MAGHA, 1941 WP(C).No.2145 OF 2020(P) PETITIONER: ELECTRO PLAZA AGENCIES TKS PURAM,KODUNGALLUR,THRISSUR-680664,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER ANILKUMAR.J.S,VALIYAKONATH HOUSE,LOKAMALLESWARAM,KODUNGALLUR.P.O,THRISSUR- 680664. BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM SMT.S.K.DEVI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT(KERALA),KODUNGALLUR-680664. 2 THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682015. 3 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KODUNGALLUR TALUK-680664. OTHER PRESENT: SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT.PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)No.2145/2020 2 ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 2145 of 2020 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2020

JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P3 appeal along with Ext.P4 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.S.K. Devi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Thushara James, 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.P4 stay application filed in Ext.P3 appeal and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through their authorised representative/ counsel, if any, shall pass orders on the stay application without much delay, preferably within a period of six weeks from 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 Ext.P1 impugned order now demanded through Ext.P5 will be kept in abeyance. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE. acd APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.3208108213/2014-15 DATED 22.2.2017 EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL ORDER NKO.KVATA 240 OF 2017 DATED 9.4.2019 EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL DATED 16.12.2019 EXHIBIT P4OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 16.12.2019 EXHIBIT P5OF THE DEMAND NOTICE NO.2019/10970/08 DATED 13.01.2020 U/S 7 AND 34 OF THE KRR ACT.