K.C. Balakrishnan vs The State Tax Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 20683 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                        PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
       TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 13TH ASWINA, 1943
                              WP(C) NO. 21047 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

                  K.C. BALAKRISHNAN
                  AGED 66 YEARS
                  PROPRIETOR, M/S BALAKRISHNA JEWELLERY,
                  G B ROAD, PALAKKAD.

                  BY ADVS.
                  SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
                  SMT.MEERA V.MENON
                  SRI.R.SREEJITH
                  SRI.K.KRISHNA


RESPONDENTS:

       1          THE STATE TAX OFFICER
                  STATE GST DEPARTMENT,
                  1ST CIRCLE, PALAKKAD-678 001.

       2          THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                  ADDITIONAL BENCH, CHEROOTTY ROAD,
                  KOZHIKODE-673 032, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

       3          THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
                  SGST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD-678 001.

                  SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, SR.GP
THIS       WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
05.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21047 OF 2021

                                           2



                        BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
                    ==========================
                       W.P.(C) No.21047 of 2021
                       ---------------------------------
                Dated this the 5 th day of October, 2021

                                   JUDGMENT

Petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of the

Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Aggrieved by

Ext.P1 assessment order, relating to assessment year

2015-2016, petitioner has preferred an appeal before

the Assistant Commissioner (Appeals), Palakkad; who

had rejected the same by a common order, which is

produced as Ext.P2. Petitioner has preferred a second

appeal before the 2 nd respondent, along with an

application for stay, which are produced herein as

Exts.P3 & P3(a). 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 WP(C) NO. 21047 OF 2021

opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed

of with a direction.

3. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3(a)

stay petition, within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

4. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings

shall be kept in abeyance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/06/10//2021 WP(C) NO. 21047 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21047/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2015-16.

Exhibit P2 COPY OF COMMON ORDER ISSUED BY THE ASST.COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) PALAKKAD.

Exhibit P3 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3(A) COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 COPY OF CHALLAN EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS             :   NIL




                                             TRUE COPY     P.A.TO JUDGE