Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8171 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 18491 OF 2018
PETITIONER:
T.K.UMMER
PROPRIETOR, M/S NAVARATNA HYPER
MARKET,ASHTAMICHIRA
BY ADVS.
SMT.S.K.DEVI
SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER
STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,CHALAKUDY
680307
2 THE COMMISSIONER
STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
DEPARTMENT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
3 THE SECRETARY
TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF
KERALA,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001
4 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,ROOM NO.46, NORTH
BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. RESMITHA R. CHANDRAN - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.18491 of 2018
..2..
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging 101st
Constitutional Amendment of the Kerala State Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017 stating that the provisions of the Kerala Value Added
Tax Act, 2003 (for short, "the KVAT Act") can be enforced only until
the expiry of one year from the date on which the nationwide goods
and service tax was implemented or until the amendment was
repealed by a competent legislature. The petitioner further
challenges Ext.P1 notice issued by the first respondent under
Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act, stating that it is unconstitutional as
it is ultra vires of the Constitution of India.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader.
3. The aforesaid challenge of 101 st Constitutional
Amendment of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
has been considered in Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt.Ltd. v.
State Tax Officer (IB)-1, Investigation Branch, Thiruvananthapuram
and others [2019 KHC 205] and decided against the petitioner.
Hence, in view of the judgment in Sheen Golden Jewels (supra),
the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief against the said
challenge.
W.P.(C)No.18491 of 2018 ..3..
4. However, Ext.P1, which is under challenge in this writ
petition, is a notice issued by the first respondent under Section
25(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003, for the assessment year 2011-12.
The petitioner has not so far filed objection to the notice since the
writ petition was pending before this Court. Hence, I am of the
opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to
the petitioner to file objections, if any, to Ext.P1 notice, before the
first respondent.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:
The petitioner is directed to file objections, if any, to
Ext.P1 notice with all supporting documents before the first
respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of
a copy of this judgment. The first respondent shall consider the
objections on merits and pass appropriate orders, if not already
passed, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this
judgment along with a copy of this writ petition, before the first
respondent.
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN,
MBS/ JUDGE
W.P.(C)No.18491 of 2018
..4..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18491/2018
PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT:-
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
NO.32080835711/2011-12 DATED 25-4-
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!