ITC LTD. vs. Deputy Commissioner

Facts

The petitioner, ITC Ltd., is challenging an order of assessment (Ext.P1) passed under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, for the assessment year 2014-15. The petitioner filed a statutory appeal before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals)-II (2nd respondent) along with a stay application. The appeal was heard on September 22, 2022, and orders are still awaited. In the interim, the petitioner received a notice (Ext.P4) proposing recovery of amounts due under the assessment order. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking relief.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing that any proceedings for recovery of amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall remain suspended until orders are passed on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) before the 2nd respondent. This decision was made considering the submission that the appeal had already been heard on September 22, 2022. The Court acknowledged the pendency of the appeal and the fact that it had been heard, implying that a stay on recovery would be appropriate pending the appellate authority's decision. The ratio decidendi is that when a statutory appeal has been heard and is awaiting decision, recovery proceedings can be suspended by the High Court in its writ jurisdiction to ensure that the fruits of the appeal are not rendered nugatory.

Key Issues

1. Whether proceedings for recovery of amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment should be suspended pending the decision on the petitioner's statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner argued that since the statutory appeal has already been heard and orders are awaited, recovery proceedings should be stayed to protect their interests. The revenue, represented by the Senior Government Pleader, was heard but no specific argument against the stay was recorded in the judgment. The core issue revolves around the court's discretion to grant interim relief in a writ petition when a statutory appeal is pending and has been heard.