N And N Marketing vs. The State Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(C)/3481/2019HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01009170201906 February 2019Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU3 pages

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 WEDNESDAY,THE 06TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 17TH MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 3481 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: N AND N MARKETING,PUTHUPPADY P.O. PERUMATTOM MUVATTUPUZHA 686 673 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI NIHAD K.S. BY ADVS. SRI.AJI V.DEV SMT.O.A.NURIYA SRI.ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV SRI.M.G.SHAJI RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX MUVATTUPUZHA 683572. 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX TAX COMPLEX, THEVARA, PERUMANOOR P.O. ERNAKULAM 682 015. 3 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR MUVATTUPUZHA 683572. GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 3481 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 order, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating its 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 its statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that it 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

JUDGE WP(C).No. 3481 of 2019 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 18-06-2018. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE APPEAL FILED FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 18-12-2018. EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE STAY PETITION FILED FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 18-12-2018. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE RR NOTICE IN FORM NO. 1 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED, 02-11-2018 ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE RR NOTICE IN FORM NO. 10 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 DATED 27-11-2018 ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

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.