Beauty Silks vs. The State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 21 January 2019

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU MONDAY,THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 1ST MAGHA, 1940 WP(C).No. 463 of 2019 PETITIONER: BEAUTY SILKS,CALICUT ROAD, EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA-679576, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P.S. MUBARAK. BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.P.F.JOY RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE SGST DEPARTMENT, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -679582. 2 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED 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 - 100001. ADDL AG SRI. K.K. RAVINDRANATH SPL.G.P. SRI. C.E. UNNIKRISHNAN GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES ADDL SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI. K.M. NATRAJ CGC SRI.JAISHANKAR V. NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 463 of 2019 2

JUDGMENT In this writ petition the petitioner has approached this Court with the following reliefs: “(i) to 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) to 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do not exist from 08.09.2017 so long as the erstwhile entry 54 had not been saved to validate actions taken under the repealed Act (iii) to issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or orders or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to call for the records leading to the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 and Ext.P2(a) orders and to strike down and quash the same (iv) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or orders directing the 1st respondent or anybody acting on their behalf to refrain from taking any further action on Ext.P2 and Ext.P2(a) orders.”

The learned counsel agree that the issue stands squarely covered against the petitioner by judgment dated 11th January 2019 in W.P.(C) No.11335 of 2018 and connected cases. I, therefore, dismiss the writ petition applying the ratio of the judgment referred to above. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ANNUAL RETURN DATED 14/06/2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF ANNUAL RETURN DATED 26/04/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2016-17. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 13/04/2018 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO.13552/2018.