Sify Technologies Limited vs. The State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 13 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 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941 WP(C).No.33970 OF 2019(U) PETITIONER: SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, INFOPARK, TAPASYA BUILDING, KUSUMAGIRI P.O., KAKKANAD - 682 030, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY MR. RAVI KRISHNAN S - AUTHORISED SIGNATORY. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH JERARD SAMSON RODRIGUES SRI.ROVIN RODRIGUES RESPONDENT: THE STATE TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE - IV, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM - 682 018, ERNAKULAM DSITRICT. SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT.PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 33970 of 2019 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of January, 2020

J U D G M E N T The case projected in this Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows: The petitioner has filed audit report and statement in form No.13 and 13A for the assessment year 2011-2012 and an excess input tax credit of Rs.54,33,497/- was reflected in the audit statement. Further the petitioner requested the respondent to refund the excess VAT of Rs.54,33,497/- paid during the assessment year 2011-2012 as per Ext.P-2 application dated 1.10.2019. The petitioner has also submitted Ext.P-3 application dated 25.10.2019 in form No.21CC claiming refund of input tax remaining adjusted relating to 4 quarters of the assessment year 2011-2012. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to consider Exts.P-2 & P-3 applications expeditiously. It is in the light of these averments and contentions that the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition (Civil) with the following prayers: “ 1) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction directing the Respondent to consider Exhibits P2 and P3 applications and process the refund of excess input tax expeditiously. 2) Pass such other order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case.”

..3..

Heard Sri.Joseph Jerard Samson Rodrigues, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Thushara James, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

After hearing both sides and after taking note of the pleadings and materials on record, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the respondent will take up the plea made by the petitioner for grant of refund as made out in Exts.P-2 & P-3 applications without much delay, and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through his authorised representative or counsel if any, will render a considered decision thereon, without much delay preferably within a period of 4 to 5 weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Depending upon the outcome of the decision that may be so taken by the respondent, necessary follow-up action, if required, will have to be taken by the respondent with all expedition. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand disposed of. ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE MMG ..4.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT AND STATEMENT IN FORM NO. 13 AND 13A FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 01-10-2019 FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.21CC FILED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.