KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING) CORPORATION LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the writ petitions with a direction to the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider the prayer for interim stay in the pending appeals within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also directed that no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner until such time as the stay application is disposed of. It was clarified that any interim stay granted would be only until the disposal of the application for stay. The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeals or the stay applications themselves, but rather directed their expeditious consideration. The principle established is that in cases where appeals and stay petitions are pending, and there is a threat of coercive recovery, the appellate authority should be directed to dispose of the stay applications within a stipulated timeframe to prevent undue hardship to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Ltd (Bevco), filed two writ petitions challenging assessment orders dated February 5, 2020, and December 27, 2019. Bevco had preferred appeals and stay petitions against these orders, which were pending consideration. The assessment years involved were 2017-18 and 2018-19. Bevco contended that the demand for these years represented 20% and 30% of the total demand, as per an Office Memorandum. The petitioner sought a direction for redressal of their grievance due to the threat of coercive recovery measures.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the High Court should issue a direction for the consideration of interim stay applications pending appeals against assessment orders, and if so, what should be the timeline and conditions? Assessee's Contentions: - The petitioner argued that for a particular assessment year, an appeal (ITA 313/19) was already pending before the Division Bench of the High Court. However, for different assessment years, they had to avail the remedy of appeal as orders were being passed from time to time. - The petitioner sought redressal of their grievance due to the threat of coercive measures. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT This order shall dispose of two writ petitions wherein the petitioner, against the assessment orders dated 05.02.2020 and 27.12.2019, preferred appeals and stay petitions Exts.P2 and P3, which are pending consideration. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are 20% and 30% of demand in terms of the directions of the Office Memorandum. The petitioner’s grievance can be redressed in case an appropriate direction is issued as the threat of the coercive measures is writ large. Heard learned counsel for the parties and noticed the contentions of the counsel and pleadings. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for a particular assessment year an appeal No.ITA 313/19 is filed before the Division Bench of this Court and pending for judgment. But for different assessment year has to avail the remedy of appeal as the orders from time to time are being passed.
Keeping in view such situation, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the prayer for interim stay in pending appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, no coercive measures shall be taken. It is made clear that interim stay is only till the disposal of the application for stay. AMIT RAWAL nak JUDGE
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026