Kerala High Court
Kumarakom Lake Resort vs State Of Kerala on 18 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 28TH POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 42176 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
KUMARAKOM LAKE RESORT
(A UNIT OF M/S PAUL RESORTS AND HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED)
KUMARAKOM NORTH P.O, KOTTAYAM
SANJAY VARMA
GENERAL MANAGER, PIN - 686566
BY ADVS.
JAZIL DEV FERDINANTO
JOSE JACOB
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
COMMERCIAL TAXES, GOVT. OF KERALA,
TRIVANDRUM, KERALA, PIN - 695002
2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (WORKS CONTRACT)
OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, WORKS CONTRACT
CLASS TOWER, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD,
ERNAKULAM
KERALA, PIN - 682018
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV. THUSHARA JAMES (SR GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.42176/2022 -2-
JUDGMENT
This writ petition has been filed challenging the Exts.P7 and P8 orders of
assessment under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963
(hereinafter referred to as 'the KGST Act' for short). The short submission of the
learned counsel for the petitioner is that Exts.P7 and P8 orders of assessment for
assessment year 2018-19 and 2019-20 are almost entirely based on the order of
assessment for the assessment year 2017-18 which has been set aside by this court
on the ground that the assessment for that year was completed in violation of the
principles of natural justice. He submits that the proceedings for assessment year
2017-18 are yet to be finalized in terms of the directions contained in Ext.P2
judgment and therefore states that Exts.P7 and P8 orders of assessment which are
entirely based on the order of assessment for assessment year 2017-18 which has
been set aside by this court through Ext.P2 judgment cannot be sustained.
2. The learned Senior Government Pleader also fairly submits that since
the assessment for assessment year 2017-18 is pending before the 2 nd respondent
and since Exts.P7 and P8 appear to have been issued following the orders of
assessment for assessment year 2017-18, Exts.P7 & P8 orders of assessment can
also be set aside with a direction to the 2 nd respondent to pass fresh orders of
assessment along with the orders of assessment for assessment year 2017-18.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Learned
Senior Government Pleader for respondents, I am of the view that there is
considerable merit in the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Exts.P7 and P8 orders of assessment are therefore quashed and the assessment of
the petitioner for assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 under the provisions of
the KGST Act shall stand restored to the file of the 2 nd respondent, who shall
complete the assessment in respect of those years along with assessment for the
assessment year 2017-18 which is pending consideration before the 2 nd respondent
in terms of Ext.P2 judgment. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity of being
heard before the assessments are completed as directed above.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
AMG
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42176/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 02.03.2022
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.12.2022 IN WP(C)
NO. 15097 OF 2022
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.04.2022
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 03.05.2022
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 01.06.2022 FILED FOR AY
2018-19
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 03.06.2022 FILED FOR AY
2019-2020
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2022
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2022
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.03.2019 ISSUED FOR
AY 2014-15
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2020 ISSUED FOR
AY 2015-16
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2021 ISSUED FOR
AY 2016-17
