Parackal Granite Kerala (P) Ltd vs. STATE TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/40505/2022HC KeralaKLHC01087892202215 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, considering the facts and circumstances, including that the appeal (Ext.P2) had been finally heard on November 23, 2022, was of the opinion that recovery proceedings initiated to recover amounts due under the assessment order (Ext.P1) should be kept in abeyance. The court directed that any proceedings for recovery of the amount due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall be kept in abeyance until a final order is passed on Ext.P2 appeal. The ratio decidendi is that when an appeal has been finally heard and orders are pending, it is equitable to stay coercive recovery measures to avoid prejudice to the assessee should the appeal succeed. The operative direction was to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Parackal Granite Kerala (P) Ltd, is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2012-2013 under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed an appeal (Ext.P2) along with a stay petition (Ext.P3) before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), the second respondent. The appeal was heard finally on November 23, 2022, with orders expected shortly. In the interim, the petitioner received a notice (Ext.P4) under the Revenue Recovery Act for the recovery of amounts due under the assessment order. The petitioner sought to keep recovery proceedings in abeyance pending the decision on their appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether recovery proceedings initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act for amounts due under an assessment order should be kept in abeyance pending the final decision of an appeal filed against that assessment order, considering the appeal has been finally heard. (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that recovery proceedings should be stayed pending the final order in their appeal, which has already been heard. They relied on the fact that the appeal was finally heard on November 23, 2022, and orders were expected shortly. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Government Pleader was heard. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 40505 OF 2022 PETITIONER: PARACKAL GRANITE KERALA (P) LTD ENANALLOOR P.O., KAKKATTOOR, ERNAKULAM- REPRESENTED BY VASUDEV PRASAD, DIRECTOR, PIN - 686673 BY ADVS. P.S.SOMAN T.RADHAMONY RESPONDENTS:

STATE TAX OFFICER REVENUE TOWER, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM PIN - 686691

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) TAX COMPLEX, PERUMANOOR P.O., M G ROAD, KOCHI PIN - 682015

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX MINI CIVIL STATION, MUVATTUPUZHA PIN - 686669 OTHER PRESENT: ADV. THUSHARA JAMES (SR GP) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

-:2:- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 15 th day of December, 2022 The petitioner suffered Ext.P1 order of assessment under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, for the assessment year 2012-2013. The petitioner being aggrieved by the same. The petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Ext.P2 appeal has been heard finally on 23-11-2022 and orders are expected shortly. It is submitted that in the meanwhile, Ext.P4 notice under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, has been issued proposing to recover the amounts due under Ext.P1 order of assessment. He prays that the further proceedings for recovery may be kept in abeyance pending issuance of final order in Ext.P2 appeal. 3. Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader also. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

-:3:- and considering the fact that Ext.P2 appeal has been finally heard on 23-11-2022, I am of the opinion that the recovery proceedings initiated to recover amount due under Ext.P1 order of assessment, should be kept in abeyance till final orders are passed on Ext.P2 appeal. Accordingly this writ petition stands disposed of directing that till final orders are passed on Ext.P2 appeal, any proceedings for recovery of amount due under Ext.P1 order of assessment shall kept in abeyance. Sd/ GOPINATH P.

JUDGE mtk 15/12/2022

-:4:- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40505/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. 32151515872/2012-13 DATED 19-10-2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 01-11-2022 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED AMOUNT IN EXHIBIT- P1 ORDER FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 01-11-2022 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 06-12-2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →