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

Facts

The petitioner, Biju Anirudhan, proprietor of M/s. Anjaneya Motors, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Assistant Commissioner (Assmt.) to consider and dispose of his representations for credit of the entire amount paid. The petitioner was assessed for the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03, and 2003-04 under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. Initial assessment orders (Exts.P1, P1(a), P1(b)) raised demands for tax and interest. These were rectified by the respondent via an order dated 12.5.2008 (Exts.P2, P2(a)). However, the petitioner claims that the rectification order failed to give him credit for the entire amount paid, specifically ₹35,83,000/-. The Commissioner of State Goods and Services Taxes later promulgated an Amnesty scheme (Ext.P4) for settlement of arrears, applicable to dues under the erstwhile Kerala General State Tax Act.

Held

The Court held that the Amnesty scheme (Ext.P4) covers arrears of dues under the erstwhile Act prior to the promulgation of the Goods and Services Tax Act. The Court found that the provisions of the Amnesty Scheme indicate that authorities will take into consideration the credit made by the assessee at the time of the demand notice. The petitioner's grievance was that the authorities failed to give credit for an amount of ₹35,83,000/-. The Court was of the view that the petitioner is not prevented from taking the benefit of the Amnesty scheme. If the petitioner avails the scheme and prima facie proves the credit claimed, the appropriate authority shall consider the same and give the benefit. The Court observed that the State is a welfare state and cannot indulge in undue benefit. With these observations, the writ petition was disposed of.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to seek adjudication of his representation for credit after a delay of 11 years, considering the remedy available under the erstwhile Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963? 2. Whether the Amnesty scheme promulgated by the Commissioner of State Goods and Services Taxes (Ext.P4) covers outstanding dues under the erstwhile Kerala General State Tax Act, 1963, and allows for consideration of credit not accounted for in previous assessment or rectification orders? Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that the Amnesty scheme (Ext.P4) should be considered, and that persons who failed to avail previous remedies or claim credit would be considered under this new scheme. He sought credit for the entire amount paid, which he claims was not given in the rectification order. Respondent's contentions: The respondent argued that the petitioner's remedy was to seek rectification under the erstwhile Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, and that he cannot seek adjudication of his representation after 11 years. However, the respondent conceded that there is no bar to the petitioner claiming the benefit of the Amnesty scheme.