Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 4TH BHADRA, 1941
WP(C).No.23073 OF 2019(H)
PETITIONER/S:
SAJU P MAMPILLY
AGED 47 YEARS
PROPRIETOR, MAMPILLY POLYMER TRADERS, JAWAHAR LAL
NEHRU STADIUM, KALOOR P.O., COCHIN-682 017.
BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL
RESPONDENT/S:
1
STATE TAX OFFICER
FORMERLY INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII, STATE
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682
015.
2
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
SPECIAL CIRCLE-III, STATGE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682015.
3
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM,
COCHIN-682 015.
4
INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, CIVIL
STATION, KAKKANAD, COCHIN-682 030.
OTHER PRESENT:
GP. SMT. M.M. JASMIN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.23073 OF 2019(H)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 26th day of August 2019
The petitioner filed appeals in Ext.P4 aggrieved by the
orders of penalty in Ext.P3 made under Section 47(6) of the
KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeals with Ext.P5
stay petition. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction
to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Ext.P5
Stay Petition.
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 Ext.P5 Stay Petition results in
the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax
amount which is under challenge in Ext.P4 Appeal. 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 orders on delay petition and stay petition are
passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.
WP(C).No.23073 OF 2019(H)
3
3.
Perused Exts. P3 Penalty Order, P4 Appeal and P5
Stay Petition. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made
out for issuing necessary directions to 3rd respondent to
dispose of the stay petition in Ext.P5.
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/3rd respondent considers and disposes of Ext.P5 Stay Petition, 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 Dxy JUDGE
WP(C).No.23073 OF 2019(H) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF REPLY DATED 8.2.2016 SUBMITTED BEFORE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, CTCP, WALAYAR AGAINST NOTICE ISSUED U/S47(2) TO KVAT ACT. EXHIBIT P2OF JUDGMENT DATED 5.4.2016 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO.13302 OF 2016 IN DIRECTING TO RELEASE THE GOODS ON FURNISHING A SIMPLE BOND. EXHIBIT P3OF ORDER DATED 30.6.2019 COMMUNICATED TO PETITIONER BY IST RESPONDENT ON 19.8.2019 IMPOSING PENALTY U/S.47(6) TO KVAT ACT. EXHIBIT P4OF APPEAL SUBMITTED BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENTG AGAINST EXT.P3 PENALTY. EXHIBIT P5OF STAY PETITION DATED 26.10.2017 SUBMITTED BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT.P2 APPEAL.
