Multi Tech Services vs. State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 04 December 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 W.P(C).No.32959 OF 2019(T) PETITIONER: MULTI TECH SERVICES, HOUSE NO.179 XXVII),PALLATHUMADAM HOUSE, THRIKKAKKARA P.O., KOCHI-682 021, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,SRI. SAJI PHILIP BY ADV. SRI.BEJOY CHERIYAN RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX COMPLEX, SQUAD NO.V, ERNAKULAM, THEVARA, COCHIN-682 015 2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (WORKS CONTRACT) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, CLASS TOWER, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, COCHIN-682 018 3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, COCHIN-682 030 BY SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No.32959/2019 :: 2 ::

J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P4 penalty order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P5 rectification application before the 1st respondent. Ext.P6 is the demand notice. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 rectification application, expeditiously, and to keep in abeyance recovery steps, in the meanwhile.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 rectification application within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Recovery steps, pursuant to Ext.P6 demand

W.P.(C).No.32959/2019 notice, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 1st respondent, as directed, and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 1st respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/4/12/19

W.P.(C).No.32959/2019 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF SHOP INSPECTION REPORT DATED 18.08.2016 PREPARED BY 1ST RESPONDENT AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION CONDUCTED IN BUSINESS PLACE OF PETITIONER EXHIBIT P2OF NOTICE DATED 01.12.2016 ISSUED U/S. 67(1) OF THE KVAT ACT PROPOSING PENALTY FOR 2015-16 EXHIBIT P2 AOF REVISED NOTICE DATED 01.12.2016 ISSUED U/S. 67(1) OF THE KVAT ACT PROPOSING PENALTY FOR 2015-16 EXHIBIT P3OF DETAILED REPLY DATED 30.01.2017 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT , AGAINST EXT P2 AND P2 (A) NOTICES, OR DROPPING PENALTY PROPOSED EXHIBIT P4OF ORDER DATED 24.04.2017 COMPLETED BY 1ST RESPONDENT U/S. 67(1) OF THE KVAT ACT, IMPOSING PENALTY, ALLEGING RETURN OF NOTICE FIXED FOR PERSONAL HEARING, WITHOUT CONSIDERING MERIT OF THE CASE EXHIBIT P5OF APPLICATION U/S.66 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT P4 ORDER EXHIBIT P6 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:OF DEMAND NOTICE INFORM NO 1 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT, PURSUANT TO EXT P4 PENALTY. NIL. //// P.S. TO JUDGE