Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8182 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. 39085 OF 2018
PETITIONER:
M/s.GENERAL ELECTRO COMPONENTS,
MAIN ROAD, PAYYANNUR REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED
PERSON/PROPRIETOR SRI.NOUFAL, AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O.MOHAMMED KUNHI.
BY ADV C.K.SREEJITH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER,
STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
PAYYANNUR, KANNUR-670307.
2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS)
STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
KOZHIKODE-673001.
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. 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.39085 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 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tax was implemented or until the amendment was repealed by a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 and the petitioner further challenges Ext.P1
order under Sec.25(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003 for the assessment
year 2013-14, passed by the first respondent 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 101st 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 W.P.(C)No.39085 OF 2018
..3..
relief against the said challenge.
4. As far as Ext.P1 order is concerned, the petitioner
has already filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition
before the appellate authority. Hence, I am of the opinion that the
writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the appellate
authority to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 stay petition.
5. The writ petition is disposed of as follows:
The second respondent is directed to pass
appropriate orders, if not already passed, on Ext.P3 stay petition
after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a
period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. No coercive steps shall be taken to recover the amount
covered by Ext.P1 order for a period of one month from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a
copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition, before
the competent authority.
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE MBS/ W.P.(C)No.39085 OF 2018
..4..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39085/2018
PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED ON 29/10/2018.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE STAY
APPLICATION.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE
DT.29/10/2018.
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!