The Gateway Hotel vs The State Tax Officer (Luxury Tax)
2021 Latest Caselaw 12560 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

    WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 5TH JYAISHTA, 1943

                       WP(C) NO. 8426 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

          THE GATEWAY HOTEL
0




          BEACH ROAD, PT USHA RD, VELLAYIL, KOZHIKODE, KERALA-
          673032, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER-FINANCE, MR. VINAY
          GORAY.

          BY ADVS.
          JOSE JACOB
          SHRI.JAZIL DEV FERDINANTO

RESPONDENT:

          THE STATE TAX OFFICER (LUXURY TAX)
0




          STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE-
          673032.

OTHER PRESENT:

          GP DR. THUSHARA JAMES

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.8426 of 2021

                                           2


                                 JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of May, 2021

This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P9 to P12 orders

issued by the respondent under Section 6 (5) of the Kerala Tax

on Luxuries Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). It is

submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

notices, which were issued prior to the issuance of the orders,

were received by the petitioner only in the 3 week of February, rd

2021 and due to the lock down and the fact that the staff of the

petitioner organisation were working from home, the notices

could not be duly responded to by them. It is further submitted

that the orders have been rendered without hearing the petitioner

and that the valid contentions that the petitioner had to raise

were not considered..

2. The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that

the assessment for the financial year in question had been

completed earlier and that a pre assessment notice for reopening

the assessment and to complete the assessment under Section 6

(5) of the 'Act', had been issued to the petitioner, which was duly W.P.(C) No.8426 of 2021

served on 19.02.2021. It is only in view of the fact that no

objections had been raised by the petitioner and no request was

made either for extension of time or for producing the documents

or for a personal hearing that the orders had been passed.

3. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and

having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion

that the contention raised by the petitioner that the majority of

the staff of the petitioner were working from home and that

Exts.P5 to P8 notices escaped the notice of the officers is a

possible explanation and that as such, the issue is liable to be

reconsidered by the assessing officer. I am of the opinion that

since it is admitted that Exts.P9 to P12 orders had been passed

without the petitioner having raised any objections or any

opportunity having being given to the petitioner for a personal

hearing and since the petitioner asserts that materials are

available with the petitioner for objecting to the proposal in

Exts.P5 to P8 notices, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is

entitled to an opportunity to submit their objections and a

hearing in the matter.

W.P.(C) No.8426 of 2021

4. In the above view of the matter, Exts.P9 to P12 orders

are set aside. The matter is remitted to the respondent for a fresh

consideration after considering the objections of the petitioner.

The petitioner shall submit objections to Exts.P5 to P8 notices

within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment. Any material that the petitioner intends to rely

upon shall also be placed on record before the respondent along

with the objections. The petitioner shall also be given an

opportunity of being heard through video conferencing by the

respondent before orders are passed. The petitioner shall be

heard through video conferencing at any convenient time on

17.06.2021 as intimated to the petitioner by the respondent and

an appropriate order shall be passed and after hearing the

contentions as well.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Bng/26.05.2021 W.P.(C) No.8426 of 2021

APPENDIX PETITONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 ORDER NO.32114511437/14-15 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 16.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 ORDER NO.32114511437/15-16 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 16.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P3 ORDER NO.32114511437/16-17 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 16.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P4 ORDER NO.32114511437/17-18 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 16.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 ORDER NO.32114511437/2014-15 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 11.2.2021.

EXHIBIT P6 ORDER NO.32114511437/2015-16 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 11.2.2021.

EXHIBIT P7 ORDER NO.32114511437/2016-17 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 11.2.2021.

EXHIBIT P8 ORDER NO.32114511437/2017-18 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 11.2.2021.

EXHIBIT P9 ORDER NO.32114511437/14-15 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 1.3.2021.

EXHIBIT P10 ORDER NO.32114511437/15-16 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 1.3.2021.

EXHIBIT P11 ORDER NO.32114511437/16-17 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 1.3.2021.

EXHIBIT P12 ORDER NO.32114511437/17-18 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 1.3.2021.