M/S. Manappuram Jewellers Ltd vs The State Tax Officer-I
2021 Latest Caselaw 10880 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

   WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.8472 OF 2021(H)


PETITIONER:

               M/S. MANAPPURAM JEWELLERS LTD.,
               4/522, 1ST FLOOR, MANAPPURAM HOUSE, VALAPPAD P.O.,
               THRISSUR 680 567, REP.BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,
               BASANT BHASKAR

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

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE STATE TAX OFFICER-I,
               SGST DEPARTMENT, WADAKKANACHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
               PIN 680 582

      2        THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
               STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KILLIPPALAM,
               KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 002.


OTHER PRESENT:

               SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT. PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.8472/2021                 2


                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 31st day of March 2021

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has received pre assessment notice at Ext.P1 and the

petitioner wants time of three months to file objection in the

matter. However, the 1st respondent is not prepared to give that

much time to the petitioner despite request at Ext.P2.

3. Learned Government Pleader, after taking notice for

respondents, opposed the writ petition.

4. As it is seen that the petitioner has sought time of three

months for replying to the pre assessment notice and it is

contended by the petitioner that for preparing reply, voluminous

data or multiple data is required, the prayer made in the writ

petition seems to be genuine. Hence this writ petition is disposed

of with the following directions:

The respondents are directed to consider the request for

adjournment for a period of three months made by the petitioner

vide communication at Ext.P2 sympathetically. This Court seems

and expects that for following the principles of natural justice, the

time as prayed shall be granted by the respondents to the

petitioner for filing reply/objection to the pre assessment notice.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR

JUDGE

smp

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

True Copy

P.S to Judge

smp