Kottaram Traders vs. The Assistant Commissioner - Kerala High Court, 06 November 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 06TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 15TH KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.29729 OF 2019(M) PETITIONER/S: KOTTARAM TRADERS, PMC VI/205A, M.C.ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI.SHABU K.J. BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SMT.HARIMA HARIHARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX OFFICE, SPECIAL CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682015. 3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, O/O THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 669. 4 THE BRANCH MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542. GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.29729 OF 2019(M) 2

JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal together with Ext.P3 delay condonation application and Ext.P4 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Ext.P1 assessment order.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing 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 the following directions:

Taking note of the fact that the delay in approaching the 2nd respondent is only 167 days, I deem it appropriate to condone the delay and direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass reasoned orders on Ext.P4 stay petition 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 Exts.P5 and P6 series of orders for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above and communicated to the petitioner. It is made clear that during the pendency of the appeal the petitioner will be permitted to operate his bank account mentioned in Ext.P6 series of prohibitory orders.

WP(C).No.29729 OF 2019(M) 3

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2nd respondent, for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

JUDGE WP(C).No.29729 OF 2019(M) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 06/01/2018 FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 16/10/2019 AGAINST EXT.P1. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION DATED 16/10/2019 IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 16/10/2019 IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 09/03/2018. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF PROHIBITORY ORDER DATED 20/04/2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 A BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT BANK FOR "GATHERING DETAILS FOR EFFECTING REVENUE RECOVERY". EXHIBIT P6 B BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT BANK DIRECTING TO REMIT THE DISPUTED AMOUNT TO 3RD RESPONDENT'S ACCOUNT.