Malabar Sand & Stones PVT.LTD. vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax - Kerala High Court, 02 August 2018

Heard together (2 matters)

RP.No. 579 of 2018

WP(C) 1780/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1940 RP.No. 579 of 2018 IN WPC. 1780/2018 [JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 1780/2018 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 17-01-2018] REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION:- MALABAR SAND & STONES PVT.LTD., PARAPPA, P.O.KUTTAPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 517 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR HARIS CHARATTIADAN, S/O.MEMI, AGED 49 YEARS, KVPS VILLA, PARAMBA, IRIKKUR, KANNUR. BY ADV.SRI.PAUL K.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION:- THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGT STD, GROUND FLOOR, CIVIL STATION ANNEX, KANNUR - 670 002. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER GOVINDAN C.K. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ----------------------------------------------- R.P. No. 579 of 2018 in W.P.(C) No. 1780 of 2018 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2018

O R D E R The petitioner in the writ petition seeks review of the judgment. They were an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (the Act). Ext. P3 demand issued to them under the Act was under the challenge in the writ petition. The amount demanded in terms of Ext. P3 was ` 61,23,545/-. When the matter was taken up for admission, the learned counsel for the petitioner only prayed for indulgence to pay the amount covered under Ext. P3 in instalments. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition was disposed of permitting the petitioner to pay the amount covered under Ext. P3 in fifteen equal monthly instalments commencing from 15.02.2018. It is this judgment that is sought to be reviewed in this proceedings.

Heard learned counsel for the review petitioner as also the Government Pleader.

The counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner has remitted four instalments in terms of the judgment amounting to Rs.16,60,000/- (Rupees Sixteen lakhs and Sixty thousand only) and they could not, for reasons beyond their control, remit the remaining instalments. It was also pointed out by the learned counsel that if the petitioner is given a larger period, they will be able to pay the remaining dues, otherwise they will not be in a position to pay the amount. It was also pointed out that since the petitioner was unable to comply with the directions issued in the judgment, steps are being taken to sell the property of the petitioner for realisation of the dues.

The fact that the petitioner has remitted four instalments in terms of the judgment amounting to ` 16,60,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs and Sixty thousand only) is not disputed. It is, therefore, evident that the approach of the petitioner to this court for indulgence to pay the amounts due in instalments was bona fide. As it is found that the approach of in the petitioner to this court was bona fide and as substantial amounts are still due to be paid by the petitioner, I am of the view that if the petitioner is willing to liquidate the remaining liability in instalments, a larger period shall be given to them to liquidate the remaining liability.

In the result, the review petition is disposed of modifying the directions contained in the judgment, granting the petitioner permission to liquidate the remaining liability in twenty four equal monthly instalments, of which the first instalment shall be paid on or before 15-08-2018. Needless to say that if the petitioner commits default in remitting the amounts as directed, the respondent will be liberty to realise the balance due in lump sum. P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE pkk