Santhosh Jose, Proprietor vs State Tax Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 8275 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 25051 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          SANTHOSH JOSE, PROPRIETOR,
          M/S KANDATHIL JEWELLERY,
          THALAYOLAPARAMBU P.O.,
          KOTTAYAM - 686605.

          BY ADVS.
          P.S.SOMAN
          T.RADHAMONY


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX
          DEPARTMENT, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686141.

    2     THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
          ADDITIONAL BENCH, TAX COMPLEX, NAGAMPADAM KOTTAYAM
          DISTRICT - 686001.

    3     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ARREAR RECOVERY,
          STATE GOODS & SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
          COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686002.

          SMT.THUSHARA JAMES[SR.GP]


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 25051 OF 2023
                           -2-

                       JUDGMENT

The limited plea of the petitioner is that

respondents be directed not to act as per Ext.P5

Revenue Recovery Notice, until such time as his

Statutory Second Appeal - namely Ext.P3, is

disposed of by the 2nd respondent - Tribunal. The

petitioner further alleges that, though he has

preferred Ext.P4 Stay Petition before the said

Tribunal, no action has been taken on it until

now; and thus asserts that recovery on the

strength of Ext.P5 is impermissible.

2. The afore submissions of Sri.P.S.Soman

Pulladan - learned counsel for the petitioner,

were answered by Smt.Thushara James - learned

Senior Government Pleader, saying that, if the

petitioner only requires either Ext.P3 Appeal or

Ext.P4 Stay Petition to be disposed of within a

time frame, she will not stand in the way of

this Court passing such orders; however, praying WP(C) NO. 25051 OF 2023

that no affirmative declarations be made in his

favour in this judgment.

3. When I consider the afore submissions,

it is without doubt that, if Ext.P3 Appeal and

Ext.P4 Stay Petition are pending, then recovery

at this stage would not be apposite.

In the afore circumstances, I order this

writ petition and direct the 2nd respondent to

take up either Ext.P3 Appeal or Ext.P4 Stay

Petition and issue appropriate orders thereon,

as expeditiously as is possible, but not later

than three months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

Until such time as the afore exercise is

completed and the resultant order communicated

to the petitioner, all further action pursuant

to Ext.P5 shall stand deferred.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN akv JUDGE WP(C) NO. 25051 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25051/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 08- 11-2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST APPELLATE ORDER NO. KVATA 402/2019 DATED 06-07-2020 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOTTAYAM FOR THE YEAR 2015-

EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ERRATUM ORDER NO.

KVATA 402/2019 DATED 23-09-2019 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOTTAYAM FOR THE YEAR 2015-16

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE RECTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 23-10-2020

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE RECTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 23-10-2020

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE NO. 32051027384 DATED 26-07- 2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE RECTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16