Deepak Narendran vs. The Asst.Commissioner - Kerala High Court, 02 July 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 02ND DAY OF JULY 2019 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1941 WP(C).No.17924 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: DEEPAK NARENDRAN PROPRIETOR, M/S.NARENDRA REGENCY, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, S/O.T.K.NARENDRAN, AGED 47. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASST.COMMISSIONER SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KOTTARAKKARA-691506. 2 THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM-691001. OTHER PRESENT: GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 17924/2019 -2-

J U D G M E N T The petitioner filed appeals in Exts.P2 and P2(a) aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Exts.P1 and P1(a) made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeals with delay condonation petitions of 72 days in Exts.P3 and P3(a), and Exts.P4 and P4(a) stay petitions. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P3, P3(a), P4 and P4(a) 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 assessing authority. The delay in considering and disposing of Exts.P3, P3(a), P4 and P4(a) results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Exts.P2 and P2(a). The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeal would become -3- 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 appeals, the orders on delay petition and stay petition are passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.

Perused Exts. P1, P(a), P2, P2(a), P3, P3(a), P4 and P4(a). Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to second respondent to dispose of the delay condonation petitions and stay petitions in Exts.P3, P3(a), P4 and P(a) 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 appellate authority/second respondent considers and disposes of Exts.P3, P3(a), P4 and P4(a) applications as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this -4- 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 jjj APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 (KVAT) DATED 28.02.2019. EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16(KGST) DATED 28.02.2019. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 (KVAT) DATED 19.06.2019. EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 (KGST) DATED 19.06.2019. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 (KVAT) DATED 19.06.2019. -5- EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 (KGST) DATED 19.06.2019. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 (KVAT) DATED 19.06.2019. EXHIBIT P4 A COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 (KGST) DATED 19.06.2019.