IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 19640 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
M/S POABS ORGANIC PRODUCTS,
NELLIYAMPATHY,
PALAKKAD - 678508,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI. K.A. ABRAHAM.
BY ADVS.
HARISANKAR V. MENON
MEERA V.MENON(M-206)
SREEJITH R.NAIR
K.KRISHNA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER,
STATE GST DEPARTMENT,
CHITTUR - 678101.
2 THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOZHIKODE - 673001.
3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
STATE GST DEPARTMENT,
CHITTUR - 678101.
SMT.M.M. JASMINE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)No.19640/2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 17th day of June, 2022 The petitioner, an assessee under the KVAT Act, has approached this Court seeking to direct the 2 nd respondent to dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition by issuing a writ of Mandamus.
2. The petitioner states that in respect of the assessment year 2011-2012, the respondents have passed Ext.P1 order. The petitioner has filed a statutory appeal against Ext.P1 order. The 1 st Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal as per Ext.P2.
3. The petitioner states that the petitioner has filed an appeal against Ext.P2 and an application for stay before the 2nd respondent-Tribunal as evidenced by Exts.P3 and WP(C)No.19640/2022 3 P4. Now, the respondents are taking coercive proceedings to recover the alleged tax dues from the petitioner. Unless the respondents are restrained from taking coercive proceedings against the petitioner pending disposal of the statutory appeal by the Tribunal, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader (Taxes) representing the respondents.
5. Aggrieved by the order of the 1 st Appellate Authority, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal. The petitioner has also preferred Ext.P4 petition for stay invoking the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. In the circumstances, it is only just and proper that the respondents defer any coercive proceedings against the petitioner, till the Appellate Authority considers the stay petition.
WP(C)No.19640/2022 4 In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to defer any coercive proceedings against the petitioner till Ext.P4 stay petition is considered by the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P4, within a period of three months.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR WP(C)No.19640/2022 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19640/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.01.2019.
Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPELAS), PALAKKAD DATED 17.12.2019.
Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03.12.2020.
Exhibit P4 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 02.06.2022.
Exhibit P5 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17.05.2022.
SR