Vijay Groups Lakshmy Petroleum vs. The State Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 28TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.24801 OF 2019(A) PETITIONER/S: VIJAY GROUP'S LAKSHMY PETROLEUM III/340, MURIKKUMPADAM,AZHEEKKAL P.O, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRITRIX SMT. MRUDULA RANI BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SMT.HARIMA HARIHARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, 2ND CIRCLE, MATTANCHERRY 682 002 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SGST COMPLEX, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM 682 015 3 THE VAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 6TH FLOOR, SGST COMPLEX, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM 682 015 4 INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MATTANCHERRY 682 002 OTHER PRESENT: GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 24801/2019 -2- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 19th day of September 2019 The petitioner filed second appeals in Exts.P4 and P4(a) aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Exts.P1 and P1(a) made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act, the first appellate order in Ext.P2 and modified assessment orders in Exts.P3 and P3(a). The petitioner has filed the appeals with Exts.P5 and P5(a) stay petitions. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P5 and P5(a) expeditiously. 2. The case of petitioner is that either the mere filing of appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount to granting stay by the appellate authority. The delay in considering and disposing of Exts.P5 and P5(a) results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Exts.P4. and P4(a). The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeals would become either academic or ineffective. It is further contended by the petitioner that in the manner the law provides for protecting the interest of appellant pending appeals, the order on stay petitions is passed W.P.(C) No. 24801/2019 -3- expeditiously. Hence the writ petition. 3. Perused Exts. P1, P1(a), P2, P3, P3(a), P4, P4(a), P5 and P5(a). Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to third respondent to dispose of the stay petitions in Exts.P5 and P5(a) respectively. Having regard to the limited prayer and the grounds referred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by