Sobha LTD., (Formerly Sobha Developers LTD.) vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax (Works Contract) - Kerala High Court, 01 February 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY ,THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 12TH MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 33934 of 2018 PETITIONER/S: SOBHA LTD., (FORMERLY SOBHA DEVELOPERS LTD.) SOBHA CITY, PUZHAKKAL, GURUVAYOOR ROAD, THRISSUR 680 553 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY V.G. VENUGOPAL BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (WORKS CONTRACT), (WORKS CONTRACT), 2ND FLOOR, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 002 2 THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,MINISTRY OF FINANCE,ROOM NO.46,NORTH BLOCK,NEW DELHI-110001. OTHER PRESENT: GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES -2- W.P.(C). No. 33934 of 2018 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT The petitioner, a business concern, seeks the following reliefs: “i) declare the provisions of clauses (d) and (e) of sub- section (2) of section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act 20 of 2017) as unconstitutional and hence unsustainable in law. ii) declare that the power vested in the State Legislature under Entry 54 List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, as it stood prior to the insertion of the revised entry by the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016, do not exist from 08.09.2017 so long as the erstwhile entry 54 had not been saved to validate actions taken under the repealed Act. (iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or orders or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to call for the records leading to the issue of Ext.P2, Ext.P2(a), Ext.P4, Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 notices and to strike down and quash them.' iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or orders directing the 1st respondent or anybody acting on his behalf to refrain from proceeding further based on Ext.P2, Ext.P2(a), Ext.P4, Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 notices.” Both the counsel agree that the issues stand squarely covered against the petitioner by a judgment dated 11th January 2019 in W.P.(C) No.11335 of 2018 and connected cases. I,

-3- therefore, dismiss the writ petition applying the ratio of the judgment referred to above. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE das APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ANNAUL RETURN FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 29.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21-10-2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF REPLY DATED 7-11-2017. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 2-06-2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15 EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. -4- EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 25-09-2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 201-15. EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 13.04.2018 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C)NO.13552 OF 2018.