BharatTaxGST

Sunil Kumar V.S. vs. The State Tax Officer-1

Original PDF →
WP(C)/4623/2019HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01012119201915 February 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU3 pages
For Respondent: GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES

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 FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 4623 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: SUNIL KUMAR V.S., AGED 44 YEARS (PROPRIETOR), KUMAR TRADERS, KOTTUVALLIKKAVU TEMPLE ROAD, KOONAMMAVU P.O. NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM 683 518 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER-1, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX OFFICER, NORTH PARAVOOR- 683 513. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682015 OTHER PRESENT: GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 4623 of 2019 ..2..

JUDGMENT The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment orders, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed 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 appeal. It appears that he has also filed stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

WP(C).No. 4623 of 2019 ..3..

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 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF MODIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 17.2.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 13.2.2019 AGAINST EXT P1. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 13.2.2019 IN EXT P2 APPEAL Bka/16.02.2019

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.