K.Omana vs. The State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 27 August 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 5TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.23118 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER/S: K.OMANA PROPRIETRESS, GOOD MORNING MACHINE TOOLS AND SPARES, KSRTC JN., NH ROAD, CHATHANOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, CHATHANOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ASRAMOM, KOLLAM-691 002. OTHER PRESENT: GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.23118 OF 2019(L) -2-

JUDGMENT 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.

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 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 stay petition is passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.

WP(C).No.23118 OF 2019(L) -3-

Perused Exts. P1, P2, P3. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2nd 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 disposed of by this order: (a) The appellate authority/2nd respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P3 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 or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from today. S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS

WP(C).No.23118 OF 2019(L) -4- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL.