Krishna Kumar T. vs. State Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT The petitioner, impugning Ext.P1 assessment order under the KVAT Act, filed Ext.P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner also filed Ext.P4 stay application along with Ext.P3 delay condonation application.
In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 stay application as well as Ext.P3 delay condonation application within two months. Till then, recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned order in the appeal shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed as above. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE PR/19.07.2019
WP(C).No.19853 of 2019 ..3.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF ORDER DATED 22.5.2018 COMPLETED U/S.25(1) OF THE KVAT ACT FOR 2013-14 BY 1ST RESPONDENT, BY SCRUTINY OF ANNUAL RETURN WITH AUDIT STATEMENT SUBMITTED IN FORM NO.13A, WITHOUT VERIFICATION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. EXHIBIT P2OF APPEAL DATED 15.7.2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P1 ORDER. EXHIBIT P3OF PETITION FOR CONDONING DELAY DATED 15.7.2019 SUBMITTED ALONG WITH EXT.P2 APPEAL, BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4OF STAY PETITION DATED 15.7.2019 SUBMITTED ALONG WITH EXT.P2 APPEAL, BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5OF DEMAND NOTICE IN FORM NO.1 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT PURSUANT TO EXT.P1 ORDER.
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.