The Emerald Jewel Industry INDIA LTD vs. The State Tax Officer
Facts
The petitioner, The Emerald Jewel Industry India Ltd (Kerala Branch), filed a writ petition challenging Ext.P6 order passed by the 2nd respondent, the Intelligence Inspector IB, imposing a penalty. The writ petition was filed because the statutory Appellate Authority, against whom an appeal could be preferred against Ext.P6, was not available at the time. The petitioner had been prosecuting this writ petition for some time. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the filing of the writ petition due to the unavailability of the appellate mechanism.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge Ext.P6 order in appeal within four weeks from the date of the judgment. The Court directed that if such an appeal is filed, the Appellate Authority shall consider it, treating it as filed within time, taking into account that the petitioner had been prosecuting the writ petition. The interim stay granted by the Court was to continue until the disposal of the appeal, provided the petitioner kept the bank guarantee alive during that period. The Court did not decide on the merits of the penalty imposed by Ext.P6.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a statutory appeal against Ext.P6 order, despite the delay, considering the pendency of the writ petition. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they had been prosecuting the writ petition all these years due to the unavailability of the Appellate Authority. Therefore, they should be allowed to file an appeal now and the Appellate Authority should consider it as filed within time. Revenue's contention: The learned Senior Government Pleader for the State submitted that an Appellate Authority is now in office and an appeal can be preferred against Ext.P6. The State did not raise any objection to the petitioner filing an appeal, provided it was done within a reasonable 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 THUR AY, THE 09TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1942 WP(C).No.37554 OF 2017(T) PETITIONER: THE EMERALD JEWEL INDUSTRY INDIA LTD (KERALA BRANCH), REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, X/362/18, ABI TOWER, NEW CHURCH ROAD,RICE BAZAR, THRISSUR, PIN.680 001. BY ADVS. SRI.K.P.ABDUL AZEES SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN SMT.T.ARCHANA RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INT), SGST COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, SALES TAX COMPLEX, JAWAHAR NAGAR, ERANHIPALAM, CALICUT.673 006. 2 THE INTELLIGENCE INSPECTOR IB SQUAD NO.OIB-II, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(INT), SGST COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, SALES TAX COMPLEX, JAWAHAR NAGAR, ERANHIPALAM,CALICUT.673 006. 3 INDUSIND BANK LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGER, YMCA CROSS ROAD,CALICUT.673 001. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2- T.R. RAVI, J. ------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- Da
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.