Sameer Narayan Bandekar vs. The Assistant State Tax Officer
Facts
The petitioner, Sameer Narayan Bandekar, proprietor of Narayan Auto Works, filed a writ petition before the Kerala High Court. The petitioner sought to avail the benefit of the Supreme Court's judgment in 'In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation' to prefer an appeal before the statutory authority against an order dated March 19, 2021. The Supreme Court judgment provided an extension of limitation until October 2, 2021. The petitioner's bank guarantee was also a point of consideration. The respondents were the Assistant State Tax Officer, the State Tax Officer, and the Branch Manager of IDBI Bank.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner should be permitted to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's submission that they wished to avail the benefit of the Supreme Court's judgment in 'In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation' to prefer an appeal. The judgment explicitly stated that the writ petition was closed, reserving liberty for the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Furthermore, the Court directed that the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner shall not be invoked until the expiry of the period for filing the appeal, as the period had not yet expired. The Court did not explicitly decide on the merits of the original order but facilitated the petitioner's access to the appellate process.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the Supreme Court's judgment in 'In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation' to file a statutory appeal beyond the prescribed period, considering the order impugned was dated March 19, 2021, and the Supreme Court's decision was available until October 2, 2021? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they should be allowed to prefer an appeal before the statutory authority by taking the benefit of the Supreme Court's judgment, which extended the period of limitation. They sought to file the appeal within the extended period granted by the Supreme Court. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue or state regarding this issue. However, the court's decision implies that the petitioner's request to pursue the statutory remedy was accepted.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS WEDNE AY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/26TH KARTHIKA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 8095 OF 2021 PETITIONER: SAMEER NARAYAN BANDEKAR AGED 60 YEARS S/O. NARAYAN BABURAO BANDEKAR, PROPRIETOR, NARAYAN AUTO WORKS, 31 UMA BUILDING, KASHINATH DHURU ROAD, VEER SAVARKAR MARG, DADAR WEST, MUMBAI - 400028. BY ADV ADITHYA RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO. VII, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (INTELLIGENCE), KERALA SGST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD - 678001. 2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII, OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, KERALA SGST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD - 678001. 3 THE BRANCH MANAGER, IDBI BANK, IDBI TOWER, 10TH FLOOR, WTC COMPLEX, CUFFE PARADE, MUMBAI- 400005. DR.THUSHARA JAMES, SR. GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.8095/21 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.