BharatTaxGST

A. H. Muhammed vs. The State Tax Officer -Ii

Original PDF →
WP(C)/28456/2019HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01074085201925 October 2019Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages

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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019/3RD KARTHIKA, 1941 W.P(C).No.28456 OF 2019(F) PETITIONER: A. H. MUHAMMED AGED 67 YEARS PROPRIETOR, SHABEER ENTERPRISES, KUMARANELLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 590. BY ADVS.SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM SRI.NIKHIL JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER -II STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, WADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680582. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE P. O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680004. 3 DEPUTY TAHSILDAR THALAPPILLY TALUK, WADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT – 680582. BY SMT.M.M.JASMINE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No.28456/2019 : 2 :

J U D G M E N T Against Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders under the CST Act, for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16, the petitioner has preferred Exts.P3 and P4 appeals together with Exts.P5 and P6 stay petitions before the 2nd respondent. Exts.P7 and P8 are the revenue recovery notices. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petitions, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed by Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders.

2.

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:

W.P.(C).No.28456/2019 : 3 :

1.

The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass reasoned orders on Exts.P5 and P6 stay petitions within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.

2.

Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance till such time as orders are passed by the 2nd respondent as directed above and communicated to the petitioner.

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 prp/25/10/19

W.P.(C).No.28456/2019 : 4 : APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF ORDER U/R.6(5) OF THE KERALA CST RULES FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 24.09.2018. EXT.P2: COPY OF ORDER U/R.6(5) OF THE KERALA CST RULES FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 29.09.2018. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 19.11.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 19.11.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION IN FORM NO.30 DATED 19.11.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE STAY PETITION IN FORM NO.30 DATED 19.11.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 DATED 14.10.2019 FOR YEAR 2013-14. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 DATED 14.10.2019 FOR YEAR 2015-16. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL. //// P.S. TO JUDGE

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.