Lakshmi Narasimha Textles vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ...

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8174 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2022

Kerala High Court
Lakshmi Narasimha Textles vs The Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 1 July, 2022
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                         PRESENT
   THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
                 WP(C) NO. 26354 OF 2018
PETITIONER:

          LAKSHMI NARASIMHA TEXTLES
          MISAB COMPLEX, POST OFFICE ROAD,
          MANANTHAVADY,WAYANAD-670645.REPRESENTED BY
          ITS PROPRIETOR G.RAMAKRISHNAVEL.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.C.S.ARUN SHANKAR
          SRI.T.G.MADHAVANUNNI
          SRI.S.SHYAM KUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

   1      THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
   2      THE STATE TAX OFFICER
          MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD-6570645.
   3      CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS,
          DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF
          FINANCE,UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110001.
OTHER PRESENT:

          SMT. RESMITHA R. CHANDRAN - GP


       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.26354 OF 2018

                                  ..2..




                          JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging 101 st Constitutional Amendment of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 stating that the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, "the KVAT Act") can be enforced only until the expiry of one year from the date on which the nationwide goods and service tax was implemented or until the amendment was repealed by a competent legislature and the petitioner further challenges Ext.P1 order under Sec.25(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003 for the assessment year 2015-16, passed by the second respondent, stating that it is unconstitutional as it is ultra vires of the Constitution of India.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. The aforesaid challenge of 101st Constitutional Amendment of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 has been considered in Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt.Ltd. v. State Tax Officer (IB)-1, Investigation Branch, Thiruvananthapuram and others [2019 KHC 205] and decided against the petitioner. Hence, in view of the judgment in Sheen W.P.(C)No.26354 OF 2018 ..3..

Golden Jewels (supra), the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief against the said challenge.

4. However, as far as Ext.P1 order passed by the second respondent is concerned, the petitioner has to avail the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority and I am of the opinion that, the writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the statutory authorities by way of appeal.

Hence, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner, if so advised, may file an appeal along with petition for condonation of delay and petition for stay before the competent appellate authority, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner files appeal and petitions as above, the appellate authority shall consider and pass orders on the petition for condonation of delay as well as the petition for stay, within a period of one month thereafter, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The appellate authority shall take a lenient view while considering the petition for condonation of delay, taking into account the pendency of the writ petition before this Court and pass appropriate orders so that the statutory remedy of appeal is W.P.(C)No.26354 OF 2018 ..4..

not lost to the petitioner. No coercive steps shall be taken to recover the amount covered by Ext.P1 for a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In case of failure by the petitioner to comply with the directions as above in filing the appeal and petitions, the stay of recovery of Ext.P1 granted shall stand vacated. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition, before the competent authority.

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE MBS/ W.P.(C)No.26354 OF 2018 ..5..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26354/2018 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.04.2018 ISSUED U/S.25(1) O THE KVAT ACT, 2003 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16.

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2018 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.11335 OF 2018.