M.A.ASHRAF (PROPRIETOR), vs. THE AGRI. INCOME TAX OFFICER & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/23762/2023HC KeralaKLHC01052086202321 July 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS5 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged the pendency of the stay petition (Ext.P4) before the third respondent (Tribunal). Consequently, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by issuing specific directions. The Tribunal was directed to consider and dispose of the stay petition expeditiously, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. Furthermore, until orders were passed on the stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) and the appellate order (Ext.P2) were ordered to be deferred. The High Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of expediting the stay petition and providing interim relief.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M.A. Ashraf (Proprietor of M/s. Shangrila Trading and Marketing), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction to the VAT Appellate Tribunal (third respondent) to expedite the disposal of a second appeal (Ext.P3) and a stay petition (Ext.P4). The petitioner had filed the appeal against an appellate order (Ext.P2) passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) (second respondent). The petitioner was concerned that the Agri. Income Tax Officer & Commercial Tax Officer (first respondent) might enforce the assessment order (Ext.P1) while the appeal and stay petition were pending. The writ petition was filed on 21.07.2023.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the VAT Appellate Tribunal to expeditiously consider and dispose of the pending second appeal and stay petition filed by the petitioner? (Question of procedure and administrative efficiency). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the second appeal and stay petition were pending before the Tribunal and that there was an apprehension of coercive recovery proceedings being initiated by the assessing officer based on the assessment order, while these applications were yet to be decided. Therefore, an expeditious disposal was necessary. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Senior Government Pleader, appeared before the Court. No specific argument or contention from the revenue's side regarding the merits of the appeal or the stay petition is recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2023 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 23762 OF 2023 PETITIONER: 1 M.A.ASHRAF (PROPRIETOR), AGED 58 YEARS M/S.SHANGRILA TRADING AND MARKETING, KAIPARAMBU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680546 BY ADVS. HRITHWIK D. NAMBOOTHIRI P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENTS: 1 THE AGRI. INCOME TAX OFFICER & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680004 2 THE JOINT COMMISSISONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680004 3 THE VAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEPATMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, SALES TAX COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011 4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (RECOVERY) STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680004 BY ADVS. SMT THUSHARA JAMES, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P R SREEJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC No.23762 of 2023 2 C.S.DIAS, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.23762 of 2023 ------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2023

JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to direct the third respondent – Tribunal to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition, expeditiously.

The petitioner's case is that, aggrieved by Ext.P2 appellate order passed by the second respondent. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 second appeal before the third respondent – Tribunal. Along with Ext.P3 second appeal, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 stay petition on 04.07.2023. The petitioner is apprehensive that during the pendecny of Exts.P3 and P4, the first respondent may enforce Ext.P1 assessment order. Hence, the writ petition.

Heard; Sri.Hrithwik Damodaran N., the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Thushara James, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that Ext.P4 stay petition is pending consideration before the third respondent, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition. Resultantly, I order the writ petition as follows: (i) The third respondent – Tribunal is directed to consider and dispose of Exts.P4 stay petition, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

(ii) Until such time orders are passed on Ext.P4 stay petition, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 shall stand deferred. C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/21-07

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23762/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT - P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32080723604/ 2012-13 DATED 31.07.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT - P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER KVATA NO.81 T/2023 DATED 31.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT - P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SECOND APPEAL DATED 04.07.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT - P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 04.07.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 . RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →