Ajayakumar C.S. vs. The State Tax Officer(Ib)
Held
The Court condoned the delay of 256 days in filing the appeal before the 4th respondent. The Court directed the 4th respondent to consider and pass reasoned orders on the petitioner's stay petition (Ext.P2(b)) within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Furthermore, the Court ordered that recovery steps pursuant to the revenue recovery notice (Ext.P3) for the amounts confirmed by the penalty order (Ext.P1) shall be kept in abeyance until the 4th respondent passes orders on the stay petition and communicates them to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to furnish copies of the writ petition and the judgment to the 4th respondent.
Facts
The petitioner, Ajaykumar C.S., filed a writ petition challenging Ext.P1 penalty order issued under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. He had preferred an appeal (Ext.P2) along with a delay condonation petition (Ext.P2(a)) and a stay petition (Ext.P2(b)) before the 4th respondent, the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). The petitioner contended that despite filing these petitions, the respondents initiated recovery steps (Ext.P3 revenue recovery notice) for the amounts confirmed by the penalty order, even before the stay petition was considered. The delay in filing the appeal was 256 days.
Key Issues
1. Whether the delay of 256 days in filing the appeal before the 4th respondent should be condoned, considering the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and relevant procedural rules. 2. Whether the revenue recovery steps should be kept in abeyance pending the consideration of the stay petition by the appellate authority. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that recovery steps were being pursued prematurely, before the appellate authority had a chance to consider his application for stay. He sought a direction for the appellate authority to consider his stay petition and to halt recovery proceedings in the interim. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents.
Sections Cited
Kerala Value Added Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 30TH ASWINA, 1941 WP(C).No.27913 OF 2019(L) PETITIONER: AJAYAKUMAR C.S., HARISREE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, AJAY AND CO., KURIACHIRA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 006. BY ADV. SRI.S.SURESH BABU (CHERUNNIYOOR) RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER(IB), DEPARTMENT OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, POOTHLE P.O., THRISSUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 004. 2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 004. 3 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX SGST DEPARTMENT, STATE TAX COMPLEX, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 004. 4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) SGST DEPARTMENT, STATE TAX COMPLEX, POOTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 004. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.27913 OF 2019(L) 2 JUDGMENT Against Ext.P1 penalty order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal together with Ex
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.