BharatTaxGST

Bank Of INDIA vs. The Commercial Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(C)/2905/2018HC KeralaGSTCNR KLHC01034495201829 January 2018Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR4 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 P.B.SURESH KUMAR MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 9TH MAGHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 2905 of 2018 PETITIONER BANK OF INDIA ZONAL OFFICE, KALOOR, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER-SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN P. BY ADV.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) RESPONDENT: 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER 2ND CIRCLE, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM, PIN.683104. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, THEVARA, KOCHI, PIN.682015. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (R.R) KAKKANAD, KOCHI.682030. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER:SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 2905 of 2018 (K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.5.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONING DELAY FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER THE RR ACT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE rsr P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.2905 of 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2018

J U D G M E N T

Challenging Ext.P1 assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the second respondent. There was a delay of 147 days in filing the appeal. Ext.P3 is the application preferred by the petitioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal and Ext.P4 is the application preferred by the petitioner in the appeal for stay. It is stated that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by the order impugned in the appeal. The grievance of the petitioner, in the circumstances, concerns the delay in disposing of the appeal.

2.

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

W.P.(c).No.2905 of 2018 : 2 :

3.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the appellate authority to consider the application preferred by the petitioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Needless to say that if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned, the appellate authority shall pass orders on the application for stay preferred by the petitioner also, within the aforesaid time limit. Needless also to say that further proceedings for realisation of the amounts covered by the order impugned in the appeal shall be deferred by the respondents concerned till orders are passed on the application to condone the delay in filing the appeal, or if the delay in filing the appeal is condoned, till orders are passed on the application for stay. P.B.SURESH KUMAR

JUDGE rsr

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.