M/S.Steel INDIA Corporation vs. The State Tax Officer
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Steel India Corporation, filed a writ petition challenging Ext.P8 order passed by the 2nd respondent, the Assistant State Tax Officer, which imposed a penalty. The writ petition was necessitated because, at the time of filing, the statutory appellate authority to challenge Ext.P8 was not available. The petitioner had been prosecuting this writ petition for an extended period. The South Indian Bank Ltd. and the State of Kerala were also impleaded as respondents. The dispute involves a penalty imposed by the revenue authorities.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge Ext.P8 order by filing a statutory appeal within four weeks from the date of the order. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal as filed within time, acknowledging that the petitioner had been diligently prosecuting the writ petition. The interim stay granted by the Court was extended until the disposal of the appeal, subject to the condition that the petitioner maintains the bank guarantee. The Court's reasoning was based on the practical difficulty faced by the petitioner due to the non-availability of the appellate forum and the subsequent availability of such a forum.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner can be granted liberty to file a statutory appeal against Ext.P8 order, considering the unavailability of the appellate authority at the time of filing the writ petition and the subsequent prosecution of the writ petition. Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that due to the absence of a functional appellate authority, they were compelled to approach this Court via a writ petition. They sought permission to file a statutory appeal, emphasizing the time lost in pursuing the writ. Revenue/State: Submitted through the Senior Government Pleader that an Appellate Authority is now in office and that the petitioner can prefer an appeal against Ext.P8. They did not object to the petitioner filing an appeal, provided it was done within a stipulated time.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1942 WP(C).No.41334 OF 2017(N) PETITIONER: M/S. STEEL INDIA CORPORATION 778/26B, NEAR POOTHOTTA BUS STAND, POOTHOTTA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, VINI TEJU. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, SPECIAL CIRCLE-III, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM-682015. 2 ASST. STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO.I MATTANCHERRY AT ALUVA-682121. 3 THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. TOC-H ERNAKULAM BRANCH, TOCH-H ROAD, VYTTILA, KOCHI-19, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 4 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, KERALA GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.41334 OF 2017(N) 2 J U D G M E N T The writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P8 order passed by the 2nd respondent, whereby the petitioner was imposed with a penalty. The writ petition came to be filed in a situation where the Appellate Authority b
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.