S.Chandrasekharan Nair vs The State Tax Officer (Works ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 19089 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
 MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 22ND BHADRA, 1943
                   WP(C) NO. 18686 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          S.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR
          PROPRIETOR, M/S.JYOTHIS, T.C.4/61,
          MUTTADA ROAD, AMBALAMUKKU,
          KAWDIAR.P.O,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
          BY
          ADV.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)
          ADV.RAHUL A.
          ADV.APARNA ANIL


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE STATE TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT)
          STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER,
          KARAMANA,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN CODE-695002.
    2     THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
          STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, KARAMANA,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN CODE-695002.
          SMT. JASMINE M.M., GOVT. PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION      (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP      FOR
ADMISSION ON 13.09.2021,     THE COURT ON THE SAME       DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.18686/21
                                   -:2:-


                    BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                    ---------------------------------
                     W.P.(C). No.18686 of 2021
                    ---------------------------------
               Dated this the 13th day of September, 2021

                               JUDGMENT

Petitioner was a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax

Act, 2003. By Ext.P1 assessment order issued by the 1 st

respondent for the assessment year 2016-17, an order

demanding payment of tax and interest as specified in Ext.P1(a)

was imposed against the petitioner. Challenging the order of

assessment, petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the 2 nd

respondent along with Ext.P3 stay petition. Learned counsel for

the petitioner submitted that in spite of Ext.P3 stay petition,

respondents are initiating coercive steps and hence it is essential

that the stay petition filed by the petitioner be considered in a

time bound manner.

2. I have heard Adv.S.Anil Kumar, the learned counsel on

behalf of petitioner as well as Adv.M.M.Jasmin, the learned

Government Pleader on behalf of respondents.

3. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I deem W.P.(C) No.18686/21

it fit that Ext.P3 stay petition filed by the petitioner be directed

to be disposed of in a time bound manner.

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

respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3

stay petition filed by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible,

at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then, all coercive

proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1(a) shall be kept in abeyance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps W.P.(C) No.18686/21

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18686/2021

PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17.

EXHIBIT P1(a) COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF EXT.P1 ORDER.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL.