M/S.Confident Project(INDIA)PVT.LTD. vs. The Assistant Commissioner(Wc) - Kerala High Court, 23 October 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 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 1ST KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.22973 OF 2019(V) PETITIONER: M/S.CONFIDENT PROJECT(INDIA)PVT.LTD. 868/2, S.A.ROAD, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KOCHI- 682019, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR DR.ROY.C.J., BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER T.A.JOSEPH. BY ADVS. SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM SRI.NIKHIL JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(WC), O/O.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, PERUMANOOR, ERNAKULAM-682015. 2 COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KARAMANA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695002. 3 STATE OF KERALA, TAXES (B) DEPARTMENT, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT. SMT. THUSHARA JAMES; GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.22973 OF 2019 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment order for the assessment year 2014-2015. Although various contentions are raised in the writ petitions in its challenge against Ext.P1 assessment order, I do not find the assessment order to be vitiated on account of any juri ictional error or non-compliance with the rules of natural justice. There is no ground therefore, to interfere with the said order in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel for the petitioner however, points out that certain deductions of tax at source which were evidenced by statutory certificates, have not been considered by the authority and the deductions from the computation have not been effected by the Assessing Authority. Taking note of the said submission, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted an opportunity to seek a rectification of the assessment order through a rectification application filed before the Assessing Authority. Under such circumstances, while dismissing this writ petition in its challenge against Ext.P1 assessment order, I permit the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent with a rectification application to rectify the factual/computational mistakes alleged to have crept into the assessment order. The petitioner shall file an application before the 1st respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, and on receipt of the same, the 1st respondent shall proceed to consider and pass orders on WP(C).No.22973 OF 2019 3 the same within a period of three weeks thereafter, after hearing the petitioner. In that event, the recovery steps for recovery of the amounts covered by Ext.P1 order shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 1st respondent passes orders in the rectification application as directed, and communicates the same to the petitioner. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not approach the 1st respondent within the time granted in this judgment, then he will lose the benefit of this judgment. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE SJ

WP(C).No.22973 OF 2019 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32072009905/2014-15 DATED 29.7.2019. EXHIBIT P2OF THE NOTICE NO.32072009905/2014-15 DATED 11.2.2019. EXHIBIT P3OF THE NOTICE NO.32072009905/2014-15 DATED 25.2.2019. EXHIBIT P4OF THE LETTER DATED 29.4.2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF THE INTIMATION LETTER DATED 3.5.2019 TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6OF AUDIT REPORT INFORM NO.13 & 13A SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND PROSPECTIVE BUYER, SMT.REMYA RAJEEV MENON, EXECUTED ON 15.12.2009. EXHIBIT P8OF THE SALES DEED NO.311/1/2014 DATED 29.3.2014. EXHIBIT P9OF THE FORM NO-1 DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25-9-2019