SRI M.A.ASHRAF, PROPRIETOR vs. THE AGRI. INCOME TAX OFFICER & STATE TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/7075/2023HC KeralaKLHC01016687202302 March 2023Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI3 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala directed the 2nd respondent (Joint Assistant Commissioner (Appeals)) to take up the petition for condoning the delay (Ext.P3) and pass orders thereon. If the delay is condoned, the 2nd respondent is further directed to consider the application for stay (Ext.P4) filed along with the appeal (Ext.P2) and dispose of the stay petition within two months. Coercive steps for recovery pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) are to be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the delay and stay petitions. The Court did not decide on the merits of the assessment order or the appeal itself, focusing solely on procedural directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sri M.A. Ashraf, proprietor of M/s. Shangri-La Trading and Marketing, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an assessment order (Ext.P1) and seeks a direction for the Joint Assistant Commissioner (Appeals) (2nd respondent) to consider his appeal (Ext.P2). The appeal was filed with delay petitions (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P4). The petitioner also prayed for a stay on recovery steps initiated based on the assessment order. The respondents include the Agri. Income Tax Officer & State Tax Officer, the Joint Assistant Commissioner (Appeals), the Deputy Commissioner, and the Deputy Tahsildar.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the 2nd respondent should be directed to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order, including the delay and stay petitions? (Question of procedure/mixed law and fact). The petitioner contended that the 2nd respondent should be directed to consider his appeal, delay petition, and stay petition. The revenue, represented by the Government Pleader, took notice of the writ petition. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue regarding the merits of the appeal or the delay. The core issue revolves around the procedural direction for the appellate authority to consider the pending applications.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 7075 OF 2023 PETITIONER: SRI M.A.ASHRAF, PROPRIETOR M/ S.SHANGRI-LA TRADING AND MARKETING, KAIPARAMBU, THRISSUR - 680546 BY ADVS. P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI HRITHWIK D. NAMBOOTHIRI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE AGRI. INCOME TAX OFFICER & STATE TAX OFFICER STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPT. POOTHOLE, THRISSUR ., PIN - 680004 2 THE JOINT ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR ., PIN - 680004 3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TALX DEPT. POOTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680004 4 THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR O/O THE TAHASILDAR TALUK OFFICE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680020 DR. THUSHARA JAMES, SR.GP. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 7075 OF 2023 2 T.R. RAVI, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.7075 of 2023 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2023 JUDGMENT Admit. Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. The limited prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P2 appeal filed against Ext.P1 assessment order and Exts.P3 and P4 delay petition and stay petition. There is also a prayer to stay all recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P1. In view of the limited prayer made in the writ petition, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up Ext.P3 petition for condoning the delay and pass orders. On condoning the delay, Ext.P4 application for stay filed along with Ext.P2 appeal shall be taken up for consideration and the stay petition shall be disposed of within two months. The coercive steps for recovery pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance till disposal of Exts.P3 and P4. Sd/- T.R.RAVI JUDGE LEK

WP(C) NO. 7075 OF 2023 3 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7075/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit- P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32080723604/2012-13 DATED 31.07.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2013-14 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit - P 2 TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST APPEAL DATED 21.02.2023 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit -P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION DATED 21.02.2023 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit- P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 21.02.2023 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →