Shaji S. vs. State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 13 February 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 24TH MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 4298 of 2019 PETITIONER: SHAJI S, AGED 51 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, AKSHARA ELECTRICALS, 41/3108, GROUND FLOOR, NO.A-10, V.B.UDYOG, ST.VINCENT ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 018. BY ADVS. SRI.K.N.SREEKUMARAN SRI.N.SANTHOSHKUMAR SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR (A-1768) RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE TAX OFFICER, WORKS CONTRACT, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CLAS TOWERS, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 018. 2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM-682 015. 3 INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 030. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR. THUSHARA JAMES. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 WP(C).No. 4298 of 2019

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 order, 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.

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

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.

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 SKA JUDGE

3 WP(C).No. 4298 of 2019 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32072074312/2017-18 DATED 29.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 AGAINST EXT.P1 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 8.2.2019. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 8.2.2019. EXHIBIT P2 BOF THE EARLY HEARING PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 8.2.2019. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

//// PA TO JUDGE