Kerala High Court
Southern Jwellery And Die Works vs State Of Kerala on 8 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.372 OF 2021(V)
PETITIONER:
SOUTHERN JWELLERY AND DIE WORKS
CHRISTOPHER NAGAR, ANCHERY PO, THRISSUR-680 006
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR C A COLLINS.
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR)
SHRI.AKHIL SURESH
JESLIN DOLLY MATHEWS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)-I
SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX POOTHOLE
THRISSUR-680 004.
3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ASSMT.)-I
SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX POOTHOLE
THRISSUR-680 004.
SMT. THUSHARA JAMES - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).373/2021(V), WP(C).455/2021(F), THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.373 OF 2021(V)
PETITIONER:
SOUTHERN JWELLERY AND DIE WORKS
CHRISTOPHER NAGAR, ANCHERY P.O., THRISSUR-680 006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR C.A.COLLINS
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR)
SHRI.AKHIL SURESH
JESLIN DOLLY MATHEWS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)-I,
SPECIAL CIRCLE,SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX,
POOTHOLE THRISSUR-680 004
3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ASSMT.)-I,
SPECIAL CIRCLE,SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX,
POOTHOLE THRISSUR-680 004
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).372/2021(V), WP(C).455/2021(F), THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.455 OF 2021(F)
PETITIONER:
SOUTHERN JEWELLERY AND DIE WORKS
CHRISTOPHER NAGAR, ANCHERY P.O., THRISSUR-680 006,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR C.A.COLLINS.
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR)
SHRI.AKHIL SURESH
JESLIN DOLLY MATHEWS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 ASSISTANT COMMISSINER (ASSESSMENT) I,
SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX,
POOTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004.
3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ASSMT)I,
SPECIAL CIRCLE, SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX,
POOTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 004.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).372/2021(V), WP(C).373/2021(V), THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 4
JUDGMENT
These three cases, filed by the same
petitioner have been considered together on
account of the analogous factual circumstances
pleaded and the similarity in the reliefs
sought for.
2. The petitioner in these cases impugn
Ext.P4 orders and they say that they are
vitiated on account of various factors,
including that it has been issued without
affording them an opportunity of being heard.
The petitioner also has a case, in one of the
writ petitions, that they have discontinued
their business in the year 2013 and that even
though the TIN was allotted to another dealer,
the Assessment Officer has mulcted them with
liability for articles which they do not sell.
3. On hearing Shri.Akhil Suresh, learned
counsel for the petitioner as afore on
07/01/2021, I had directed Smt.Thushara James,
learned Government Pleader, to obtain
instructions from the 3rd respondent in these
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 5
cases as to whether the impugned orders were
issued after affording them an opportunity of
being heard.
4. Today, when this matter was called,
Smt.Thushara James submitted that, as has been
recorded in the impugned orders, the
petitioner had not been heard before they were
issued by the 3rd respondent; but that the
assessment has been made based on valid inputs
and materials. She, however, submitted that if
this Court is so inclined, the 3rd respondent
is willing to hear the petitioner leading to a
fresh decision, after giving them a chance to
produce all documents, including in
substantiation of their plea that they had
stopped their business in the year 2013 and
had surrendered their TIN.
Taking note of the afore submissions and
hence without entering into the merits of the
dialectical contentions of the rival parties,
I order these writ petitions, setting aside
Ext.P4 in all of them; with a concomitant
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 6
direction to the 3rd respondent to reconsider
the entire matter, after affording an
opportunity of being heard to the petitioner
and after allowing them opportunity of
producing all relevant documents in
substantiation of their contentions, including
that they had discontinued their business in
the year 2013 - either physically or through
video conferencing - thus culminating in an
fresh assessment order for all the three
assessment years, namely 2013-2014, 2014-2015
and 2015-2016.
It is needless to say that since I have
not considered any of the contentions of the
petitioner on its merits, all of them are left
open to be pursued by them before the 3 rd
respondent in terms of law.
In order to enable an expeditious
compliance of the directions in this judgment,
I direct the petitioner to mark appearance in
the office of the 3rd respondent at 11.00 a.m.
on 19/01/2021; on which day the competent
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 7
Authority may either hear them or fix another
date for hearing suitably.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/8.1.2021
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 8
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 372/2021
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
NO.32081467285/2013-14 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 3.3.2020.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF TIN CANCELLATION STATUS OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 1.4.2013.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION OF M/S. CYBER GACE SYSTEMS
DATED 4.7.2007.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.32081467285/2013-2014
DATED 24.3.2020.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.2.2020 IN
WPC NO.3802 OF 2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.7/2014
BB1/3589/2014 DATED 3.2.2014.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.6/2019
CT/5634/2019-C1 DATED 15.5.2019.
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 9
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 373/2021
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF TIN CANCELLATION STATUS OF THE
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
NO.32081467285/2015-2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 03.03.2020
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION OF M/S. CYBER GACE SYSTEMS
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.32081467285/2015-
2016 DATED 24.03.2020
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.7/2014
BBI/3589/2014 DATED 3RD FEBRUARY ,2014
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.6/2019
CT/5634/2019-C1 DATED 15.05.2019
WP(C).No.372/2021 & Con. Cases 10
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 455/2021
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
NO.32081467285/2014-2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 03.03.2020
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF TIN CANCELLATION STATUS OF THE
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION OF M/S. CYBER GACE SYSTEMS
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.32081467285/2014-
2015 DATED 24.03.2020
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.7/2014
BB1/3589/2014 DATED 3RD FEBRUARY ,2014
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.6/2019
CT/5634/2019-C1 DATED 15.05.2019
MC
(TRUE COPY) PA TO JUDGE
