M/S. V.M.Traders vs Commercial Tax Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 9211 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 1ST BHADRA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 26289 OF 2014


PETITIONER/S:


           M/S. V.M.TRADERS, PULLUPALAM ROAD, KUNNUMPURAM,
           KOCHI - 682 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,
           V.M.SAMAD.

           BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENONSMT.MEERA
           V.MENONSRI.MAHESH V.MENON


RESPONDENT/S:


    1          COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, FIRST CIRCLE,
               MATTANCHERRY - 682 002.

    2          COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TAX TOWERS,
               KILLIPALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

               SENIOR GP - SMT.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN


        THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   23.08.2023,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.26289/2014
                              ..2..




                            JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed seeking to quash

Ext.P5 assessment order passed by the first

respondent for the assessment year 2008-09.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. On a perusal of Ext.P5 assessment order,

it is seen that the assessment year is 2008-09,

in respect of which, Ext.P1 notice under Section

25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003

(for short, "the Act") was issued on 30.04.2014,

i.e., after five years from the last date of the

period, to which the return relates.

4. In Commercial Tax Officer, Anchal and

others v. S.Najeem and another [2018(4)KHC

666(DB)], a Division Bench of this Court has held

that the period of limitation to determine tax

payable is five years as per Section 25(1) of the

Act. In the case in hand, Ext.P1 notice under

Section 25(1) of the Act were issued on WP(C) No.26289/2014 ..3..

30.04.2014, i.e., after five years from the last

date of the period, to which the assessment

relates, i.e., after five years from 31.03.2009,

which is perfectly out of time.

5. At this juncture, the learned Government

Pleader submits that the State has filed Civil

Appeal No.4307 of 2022 before the apex court,

challenging the judgment in S.Najeem (supra),

which has been dismissed.

6. On a consideration of the facts and

circumstances, I am of the opinion that following

the judgment in S.Najeem (supra), the writ

petition can be allowed.

Accordingly, following the judgment in

S.Najeem (supra), the writ petition is allowed

and Ext.P5 order is set aside.

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

JUDGE bka/-

WP(C) No.26289/2014 ..4..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26289/2014 PETITIONER EXHIBITS

P1 - COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

P2 - COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHECK POST AUTHORITY.

P3 - COPY OF NOTICE IN FORM NO. 17A ISSUED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, CHECK POST, WALAYAR.

P4 - COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

P5 - COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.