Biju Anirudhan vs. The Asst. Commissioner (Assmt.)

Facts

The petitioner, Biju Anirudhan, proprietor of M/s. Anjaneya Motors, approached the High Court of Kerala under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He sought a direction to the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes to consider and dispose of his representations (Exts.P2 and P2(a)) for credit of amounts paid by him, which were not accounted for in the assessment orders for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The petitioner claimed that arbitrary demands for tax and interest were raised, and he was not given credit for the entire amounts paid. The respondent argued that the petitioner's remedy was rectification under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, and that adjudication after several years was not permissible.

Held

The Court held that the Amnesty Scheme (Ext.P3) covers arrears of dues under the erstwhile Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, prior to the promulgation of the Goods and Services Tax Act. It was discernible from the provisions of the Amnesty Scheme that authorities are to take into consideration the credit made by the assessee at the time of the demand notice. The Court noted the petitioner's grievance that the authorities failed to give credit for amounts of Rs.19,32,107/- and Rs.48,01,263/-. The Court was of the view that the petitioner was not prevented from taking the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme. In case the petitioner avails the scheme and prima facie proves the credit, the appropriate authority shall consider the same and grant the benefit. The Court observed that the State, as a welfare state, cannot indulge in undue benefit. With these observations, the writ petition was disposed of.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the consideration and disposal of his representations for credit of amounts paid, which were allegedly not noticed in the assessment orders for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07, under the erstwhile Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the assessment orders for 2005-06 and 2006-07 were arbitrary and failed to provide credit for the entire amounts paid by him. He further submitted that the Amnesty Scheme (Ext.P3) promulgated by the Commissioner of State Goods and Services Taxes, which covers arrears under the Kerala General State Tax Act, allows for consideration of such claims, even for those who failed to avail previous schemes or credit. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent argued that the petitioner's available remedy was to claim rectification under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. They contended that the petitioner could not seek adjudication of his representation after several years and urged for the dismissal of the writ petition. However, the respondent conceded that there was no bar to the petitioner claiming the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme.