BharatTaxGST

M/S.Orient Bell LTD. vs. Assistant Commissioner

Original PDF →
WP(C)/898/2020HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01002633202014 January 2020Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS4 pages
For Respondent: SMT.JASMINE M.M, GOVT.PLEADER

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 ALEXANDER THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 24TH POUSHA, 1941 WP(C).No.898 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER/S: M/S.ORIENT BELL LTD., AMBALAKKADAVU ROAD, INTUC JUNCTION, NETTOOR, PIN- 682 040, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, (REPRESENTED BY SRI.MANOJ KUMAR K.G, AUTHORISED SIGNATORY). BY ADVS. SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR (A-1768) SRI.N.SANTHOSHKUMAR RESPONDENT/S: 1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE-111, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 015. 2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM-682 015. 3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 030. OTHER PRESENT: SMT.JASMINE M.M, GOVT.PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 898 of 2020 ================== Dated this the 14th day of January, 2020

O R D E R Against Ext.P1 assessment order, the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P-2(a) petition to condone delay and Ext.P-2(b) stay petition. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that, before the appellate authority could consider the interim stay application, coercive recovery proceedings have been initiated. The petitioner submits that it is unjust to enforce recovery through coercive proceedings when the stay application is still undisposed of.

2.

Heard Sri.K.N.Sreekumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.M.M.Jasmine, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3.

After hearing both sides and after taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that the 2nd respondent- appellate authority shall consider Ext.P-2(b) stay petition and Ext.P-2(a) delay petition together. If the appellate authority is inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal, he shall pass orders on the stay petition also simultaneously. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till orders are - : 3 :- thus passed, further coercive proceedings initiated including revenue recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. With these observations and directions, the Writ Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. k+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE - : 4 :- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO 32071242205/2012-13/KVAT DATED 26.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE YEA 2012-13 AGAINST EXP P1 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 9.5.2019 EXHIBIT P2(A)OF THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED IN EXT P2 APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 9.5.2019 EXHIBIT P2(B)OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED IN EXT P2 APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 9.5.2019 EXHIBIT P2(C)OF THE APPLICATION FOR EARLY HEARING FILED IN EXT P2 APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 9.5.2019 EXHIBIT P3OF THE DEMAND NOTICE IN FROM 1 NO A5-4601/19 (RRC NO 53/2019) DATED 31.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

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.