Molly Jose vs The State Tax Officer (Int) ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 19492 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                     PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

         THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 25TH BHADRA, 1943

                             WP(C) NO. 19166 OF 2021

PETITIONER:



               MOLLY JOSE
               AGED 59 YEARS
               PROPRIETRIX, M/S. AUTO GRAND,
               POOTHOLE ROAD, THRISSUR.


               BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENON
               MEERA V.MENON




RESPONDENTS:




     1         THE STATE TAX OFFICER (INT)
               THRISSUR
               MOBILE SQUAD NO.II,
               STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
               THRISSUR-680004.
     2         THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
               STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT,
               THRISSUR-680004.



               SR.GP.DR.THUSHARA JAMES



THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.09.2021, THE

COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 19166 OF 2021
                                       2



                          BECHU KURIAN THOMAS,         J

                     ===========================
                          W.P.(C) No.19166 of 2021
                         ---------------------------------
                Dated this the 16 th day of September, 2021

                                JUDGMENT

Petitioner was an assessee under the Kerala Value

Added Tax Act 2003. For the assessment year 2013-

14, petitioner was saddled with a penalty of

Rs.70,137/- by Ext. P1 order. Challenging the order

of penalty, petitioner has preferred an appeal to the

second respondent. A copy of the memorandum of

appeal is produced as Ext. P2. The appeal is still

pending consideration. Petitioner has preferred a stay

petition as Ext.P3 in the pending appeal, seeking for

a stay of recovery of the amounts imposed as per

Ext. P2.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that while

the appeal is pending consideration, respondents are

initiating steps to recover the amount imposed as per WP(C) NO. 19166 OF 2021

the order impugned and that petitioner will be

subjected to irreparable hardships if the coercive

steps are proceeded with. Petitioner seeks for a

direction to consider the appeal as well as the stay

petition in a time-bound manner.

3. I have heard by Adv. Harishankar V. Menon, the

learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the

learned senior Government Pleader Dr.Thushara

James on behalf of the respondents.

4. Having regard to the circumstances arising in the

case as well as the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the parties as above, I am of the view

that this writ petition itself can be disposed of

directing the second respondent to consider and pass

appropriate orders on the stay petition filed in the

pending appeal.

5. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the second

respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders WP(C) NO. 19166 OF 2021

on Ext. P3 stay petition filed by the petitioner in the

pending appeal, 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 such a

decision as directed above is taken, all proceedings

for recovery of the amount imposed as per the order

impugned in the appeal shall be kept in abeyance.

sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/16/09//2021 WP(C) NO. 19166 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19166/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETIITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 COPY OF EARLY HEARING PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

  RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS    NIL




                                                   TRUE COPY   P.A.TO JUDGE