K.K.R.Food Products vs. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) - Kerala High Court, 21 August 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941 WP(C).No.22693 OF 2019(J) PETITIONER: K.K.R.FOOD PRODUCTS KURUVAMPADATH HOUSE, OKKAL P.O., KALADY -683 550- REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER PARTNER MR. BIJU KARNAN BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SMTG.MINI(1748) SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD SHRI.ABRAHAM JOB SRI.AJAY V.ANAND RESPONDENTS: 1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682 016 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, PERUMBAVOOR-683 542 GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.22693 OF 2019(J) 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeal in Ext.P2 aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Ext.P1 made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeal with a delay condonation petition of 373 days in Ext.P3 stay petition. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P3 and P4 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.P3 and P4 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 orders on delay petition and stay petition are passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.

Perused Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P4. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to the 1st respondent to WP(C).No.22693 OF 2019(J) 3 dispose of the delay condonation petitions and stay petitions in Exts.P4 and P3 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 this order: (a) The 1st respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Exts.P4 and P3 applications 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 N //// PA to Judge JUDGE

WP(C).No.22693 OF 2019(J) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 31.05.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FOR AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P3OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY FOR AY 2012-13 EXHIBIT P4OF APPLICATION TO CONDONE DELAY FOR AY 2012-13