M/S. Victory Paper And Boards (INDIA) LTD. vs. State Tax Officer - Kerala High Court, 06 August 2018

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 15TH SRAVANA, 1940 WP(C).No. 26553 of 2018 PETITIONER M/S. VICTORY PAPER AND BOARDS (INDIA) LTD. (FORMERLY M/S. VICTORY PAPER AND BOARDS (P) LTD) POST BOX NO.36, 1/281-G, VICTORY PRESS BUILDING, KUNNAMKULAM 680 503, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, K P SAXON BY ADV.SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT MINI CIVIL STATION, KUNNAMKULAM 680 501. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, PUTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 004. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, PUTHOLE,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 004. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26553 of 2018 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ANNUAL RETURN DATED 13.06.2017 SUBMITTED FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29.06.2018 COMPLETED BY 1ST RESPONDENT FOR 2016- 17 U/R6(5) OF THE CST RULES, IN DISALLOWING 'C' FORM DECLARATIONS WITHOUT AFFORDING PROPER HEARING P3: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 31.07.2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT

AGAINST EXT.P2 ORDER P4:OF STAY PETITION DATED 31.07.2018 SUBMITTED ALONG WITH EXT.P3 APPEAL BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT JJJ

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 26553 of 2018 (T) ------------------------------------------ Dated: 06th August, 2018 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act) on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned Ext.P2 assessment for 2016-17 under Rule 6(5) of the CST Rules before the second 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 and the appeal, 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 its W.P.(C) No.26553/2018 -2- 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 second respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the second respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE jjj 06/08/2018