M/S.Kalyan Jewellers INDIA LTD. vs. The Asst. Commissioner (Assmt) - Kerala High Court, 30 August 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 8TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.23540 OF 2019(N) PETITIONER/S: M/S.KALYAN JEWELLERS INDIA LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KALYAN JEWELLERS, KOLLAM), BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR T.K.SEETHARAM. BY ADVS. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (ASSMT), SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT (KERALA), COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, KOLLAM- 691013. 2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB)-II, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT (KERALA) KOLLAM, COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, KOLLAM-691013. 3 THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL.BENCH, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695010. OTHER PRESENT: GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.23540 OF 2019(N) -2-

JUDGMENT The petitioner filed second appeals in Exts.P4 and P5 aggrieved by the orders of penalty in Exts.P1 and P2 made under Section 67(1) of the KVAT Act and the appellate order in Ext.P3. The petitioner has filed the appeal with Exts.P6 and P7 stay petitions. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 and P7 expeditiously.

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.P6 and P7 results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Exts.P4 and P5. The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeal would become either academic or ineffective. It is further contended

WP(C).No.23540 OF 2019(N) -3- by the petitioner that in the manner the law provides for protecting the interest of appellant pending appeal, the order on stay petition is passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.

Perused Exts. P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6 and P7. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to third respondent to dispose of the stay petition in Exts.P6 and P7. 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 this order: (a) The appellate authority/third respondent considers and disposes of Exts.P6 and P7 application as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. (b) The respondents are directed not to take coercive steps

WP(C).No.23540 OF 2019(N) -4- or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from today. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS

WP(C).No.23540 OF 2019(N) -5- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.CR.66/2017-18 (2012-13) DATED 31.03.2018. EXHIBIT P2OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.CR.69/2017-18(2013-14) DATED 31.03.2018. EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPEAL ORDER NO.KVATA (KLM) 67/2019 & 68/2019 DATED 13.06.2019. EXHIBIT P4OF THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 22.07.2019. EXHIBIT P5OF THE APPEAL FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 22.07.2019. EXHIBIT P6OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 22.07.2019. EXHIBIT P7OF THE STAY PETITION FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 DATED 22.07.2019.