Gireesh T.G vs. The State Tax Officer
Facts
The petitioner, Gireesh T.G., proprietor of M/s. Amrutha Cashews, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the 2nd respondent, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), to dispose of appeals filed against assessment orders issued by the 1st respondent, the State Tax Officer. The appeals, filed against assessment orders dated 28.11.2019, 29.06.2020, and 25.09.2020, pertain to the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16. These appeals were accompanied by applications for stay. The petitioner contended that recovery proceedings were being initiated while the appeals were pending. The Government Pleader submitted that the appellate authority would consider the stay petitions within two months.
Held
The Court directed the 2nd respondent, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), to consider and pass appropriate orders on the stay petitions (Exts.P3, P3(a), and P3(b)) filed in connection with the appeals (Exts.P2, P2(a), and P2(b)). These orders are to be passed as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment, after providing notice to the petitioner. The Court also ordered that until such time as orders are passed on the stay petitions, any coercive steps pursuant to the assessment orders (Exts.P1, P1(a), and P1(b)) shall be kept in abeyance. The Court did not decide the merits of the appeals themselves, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of disposing of the stay applications.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the stay petitions filed by the petitioner in relation to the assessment orders. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to compel the appellate authority to decide the pending stay petitions and appeals, as recovery proceedings were being initiated during the pendency of these matters. Revenue's Argument: The learned Government Pleader agreed that the 2nd respondent appellate authority shall consider and pass appropriate orders on the stay petitions within a specified period.
Sections Cited
Article 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN THUR AY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1942 WP(C).No.25473 OF 2020(H) PETITIONER/S: GIREESH T.G, AGED 38 YEARS PROPRIETOR, M/S.AMRUTHA CASHEWS, MUGHATHALA, KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.BOBBY JOHN SRI.S.AJAYGHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER II CIRCLE, KOLLAM ,SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, AISWARYA NAGAR, ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM,PIN-691 002 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEAL), SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, AISWARYA NAGAR, ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM,PIN-691 002 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAXES KERALA, TAX TOWER, KILLIPPALAM, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 002 OTHER PRESENT: SMT TUSHARA JAMES - GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2- W.P.(C). No. 25473 of 2020 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is an assessee under the 1st respondent, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent appellate authority to dispose of Exts.P2, P2(a) and P2(b) appeals filed aga
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.