Steel Track vs The Assistant Commissioner
2021 Latest Caselaw 22905 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
   TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 26138 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          STEEL TRACK
          KARUVILASSERY, MALA, THRISSUR, NOW AT 17/599, VIRTUE
          TOWER C BLOCK, PARA ROAD, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD-678 621
          REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI. MOHAMMED
          NISTHAR P.Y.
          BY ADVS.
          N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR
          ANTONY JONES


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
          STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OFFICE,
          BUILDING COMPLEX, WADAKKANCHERY-680 582.
    2     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
          STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE,
          THRISSUR-680 004.
    3     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
          STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA,
          IRINJALAKUDA-680 125.
OTHER PRESENT:

          SRGP.DR.THUSHARA JAMES


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 26138 OF 2021
                                2

                BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
           -----------------------------------------
                W.P.(C) No. 26138 of 2021
            ----------------------------------------
        Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2021

                          JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment relating to

assessment year 2015-16, petitioner has preferred an appeal

before the 2nd respondent, a copy of which is produced as

Ext.P2 along with Ext.P3 delay condonation petition. A petition

for stay of proceedings pursuant to the assessment order has

also been filed as Ext.P4. Petitioner apprehends coercive

proceedings to be effected even before the petition for stay is

considered. Hence this writ petition.

2. Having considered the submissions of the counsel for

the petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion

that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a

direction.

3. Though the learned counsel for the petiioner invited

my attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court In Re:

Cognizance for extension of limitation (2021 (5) KLT WP(C) NO. 26138 OF 2021

689), I am of the view that, it is for the authority to consider

the same and pass appropraite orders on the delay

condonation petition. No doubt, if the period is covered by

the judgment mentioned above, necessarily, the delay will

have to be condoned.

4. Accordinlgy, there will be a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to consider Ext.P3 delay petition, and thereafter,

if the delay is condoned, pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4

stay petition as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a

period of three months from the date of reciept of a copy of

this judgment. Till such orders are passed, all coercive

proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5 demand notice shall be kept

in abeyance .

This writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM WP(C) NO. 26138 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26138/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY IST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 22.3.2021.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2021.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE KERALA REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 15.9.2021.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

AJM                //TRUE COPY//         PA TO JUDGE