Rexine House 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.24776 OF 2019(V) PETITIONER/S: REXINE HOUSE VELLOORKUNNAM, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 673, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. MOIDEEN K.A BY ADVS. SRI.AJI V.DEV SRI.M.G.SHAJI SRI.ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 673 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, TAX COMPLEX, THEVARA, PERUMANOOR P.O, ERNAKULAM-682 015 3 THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 673, ERNAKULAM DIST. 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. 24776/2019 -2- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 19th day of September 2019 The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the order of assessment in Ext.P1 made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeal with Ext.P3 stay petition. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 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 Ext.P3 results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Ext.P2. The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeal 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 appeal, the order on W.P.(C) No. 24776/2019 -3- stay petition is passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition. 3. Perused Exts. P1, P2 and P3. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to second respondent to dispose of the stay petition in Ext.P3. Having regard to the limited prayer and the grounds referred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be