BharatTaxGST

M/S.Teejan Foods (P) LTD vs. The Deputy Commissioner ( Appeals), Ernkulam

Original PDF →
WP(C)/25749/2018HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01057336201831 July 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU4 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 TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2018 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1940 WP(C).No. 25749 of 2018 ----------------------- PETITIONER ---------- M/S.TEEJAN FOODS (P) LTD, MUTTOM P.O, THAIKATTUKKARA, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR. ARUN LAL T. BY ADVS.SRI.A.KUMAR SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SMTG.MINI(1748) SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ( APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM, 682016. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE TAX 11, SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MATTANCHERRY 682 002. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI 682 002. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.V. WP(C).No. 25749 of 2018 (P) -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 27.4.2018. EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 01.06.2018. EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 01.06.2018. EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 11.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------- /TRUE COPY/ K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE 10.08.2018 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. ============================================== W.P.(C). No. 25749 of 2018 (P) ======================================================= Dated this the 31st day of July, 2018

JUDGMENT The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 2nd respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order before the 1st respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating his 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 his statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking

-2- W.P.(C). No. 25749 of 2018 (P) further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.

4.

Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 1st respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the 1st respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE das 31.07.2018

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.