Abhijith Mohan vs The Assistant Commissioner
2021 Latest Caselaw 11517 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

    THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.8902 OF 2021(K)


PETITIONER:

               ABHIJITH MOHAN,
               PROPRIETOR,
               M/S GLOBAL FOODS, MANGAD P. O., KOLLAM.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
               SMT.MEERA V.MENON

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
               SECOND CIRCLE, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT,
               KOLLAM - 691 001.

      2        THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
               STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT,
               KOLLAM - 691 001.


OTHER PRESENT:

               SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT.PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.8902/2021               2


                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of April 2021

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2. The Central Sales Tax assessment for the year 2017-18

was completed by the assessing officer by the assessment order

at Ext.P1. Feeling aggrieved by the said assessment order, the

petitioner preferred appeal, Ext.P2 and stay petition, Ext.P3 before

the 2nd respondent.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is to the effect that

pending appeal and stay petition, the 1st respondent is taking

steps for recovering the amount determined by the assessment

order at Ext.P1. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore

submits that during the pendency of the appeal, recovery in

pursuant to the assessment order at Ext.P1 be stayed.

4. Learned Government Pleader, after taking notice for

respondents, submits that stay petition can be directed to be

decided within a period of two months and till that time, recovery

proceedings can be directed to be kept in abeyance.

In this view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of

with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and decide the

stay petition, Ext.P3 in the pending appeal, Ext.P2 by following

due process of law within a period of two months from the date of

communication of this judgment to him. The petitioner to furnish

copy of the judgment to the 2nd respondent for compliance. Till

disposal of the stay petition within the prescribed time frame

given by this Court, recovery proceedings in pursuant to the

assessment order at Ext.P1 should be kept in abeyance.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR

JUDGE

smp

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER IS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DTD.29.12.2020

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.22.03.2021.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.22.03.2021 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

True Copy

P.S to Judge

smp