BharatTaxGST

Bindu.K.V vs. The State Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(C)/5654/2019HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01014759201926 February 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU3 pages
For Petitioner: SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 5654 of 2019 PETITIONER: BINDU.K.V, AGED 41 YEARS, PROPRIETRIX, M/S.GIRI HARDWARES, KARIMBAN, MANIPPARA.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, W/O.K.I.HARI. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, CHERUTHONI AT IDUKKI. 2 THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM-686 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR. THUSHARA JAMES. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 WP(C).No. 5654 of 2019

JUDGMENT The petitioner, an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 series assessment orders, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3.

I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time his statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

4.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2nd respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the 2nd respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE SKA

3 WP(C).No. 5654 of 2019 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 27.10.2018. EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 27.10.2018. EXHIBIT P1 B COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 27.10.2018. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2014-15 DATED 10.1.2019. EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2015-16 DATED 10.1.2019. EXHIBIT P2 B COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2016-17 DATED 10.1.2019. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2014-15 DATED 18.1.2019. EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2015-16 DATED 18.1.2019. EXHIBIT P3 B COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT - 2016-17 DATED 18.1.2019. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL //// PA TO JUDGE

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.