M/S.POONAM GRIHANIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED, vs. THE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX OFFICER(W.C),
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court noted that the appellant did not press several of their original writ prayers, including those challenging the assessment orders and jurisdiction. The primary prayer pressed was for a direction to the Assessing Officer to receive the declarations filed in Form 20H, verify their details, and grant the benefit of deduction. The revenue did not object to receiving the declarations, subject to verification. The Court acknowledged the limited objection raised by the State and stated it was not examining the extent to which the declarations should be accepted. However, it directed the Assessing Officer to consider the declarations from the perspective of examination to record a finding on entitlement and give what is due to the assessee. The dealer was granted liberty to submit or resubmit the declarations by enclosing a copy of the judgment within four weeks. The Writ Appeals were disposed of with these observations.
What were the facts?
The appellant, M/s. Poonam Grihanirman Private Limited, filed two writ petitions before the High Court of Kerala challenging revised assessment orders passed under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act, 2003. The appellant sought to quash these orders, declare that the assessing authority lacked jurisdiction to pass orders under the KVAT Act after September 15, 2017, due to the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2016, and that an authority appointed under the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, could not pass orders under the repealed KVAT Act. Additionally, the appellant sought a direction to accept Form 20H declarations and to not be liable for interest prior to demand notice. The appeals are against the common judgment dated January 11, 2019, in these writ petitions.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessing authority appointed under the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, has the jurisdiction to pass assessment orders under the repealed Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, particularly after September 15, 2017, in light of the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2016? (Question of law) 2. Whether the appellant is entitled to a direction to the assessing authority to accept and process Form 20H declarations for the respective years and grant the benefit of deduction? Assessee's Contentions: The appellant argued that the assessing authority lacked jurisdiction to issue notices or pass assessment orders under the KVAT Act after September 15, 2017. They also contended that an authority appointed under the KGST Act, 2017, cannot pass orders under the repealed KVAT Act. The appellant pressed for a direction to accept Form 20H declarations, stating they were filed in compliance with the Act and Rules, and that revised assessment orders were issued based on incompatible figures without proper verification. The appellant did not press prayers related to quashing assessment orders, jurisdiction, staying further action, and interest liability. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue stated that there should be no difficulty in receiving the Form 20H declarations, but their acceptance is subject to verification. They agreed to a direction for the officer to receive the declarations, subject to liberty to pass necessary and correct orders.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
25(1)
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1944 WA NO. 1515 OF 2019 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21184/2018 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT:
M/S.POONAM GRIHANIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED, MANIMADOM, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, PINCODE- 688561, A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY SRI.R.ANANTHA NARAYANAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR.
BY ADVS. E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENTS:
THE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX OFFICER(W.C), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MELUVALLIL BUILDING, KALLUPALAM, ALAPPUZHA, PINCODE- 688001.
THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, TRIVANDRUM- 695002.
THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM- 695001.
BY ADV SRI.K.K.RAVINDRANATH, ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL OTHER PRESENT:
GP M.M. JASMIN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.11.2022, ALONG WITH WA.1523/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1944 WA NO. 1523 OF 2019 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)35489/2018 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT:
M/S. POONAM GRIHANIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED, MANIMADOM, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, PIN- 688561, A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY SRI. R. ANANTHA NARAYANAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR.
BY ADVS. E.P.GOVINDAN SMT.G.DEEPA RESPONDENTS:
THE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX OFFICER (W.C.), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MELUVALLIL BUILDING, KALLUPALAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688001.
THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.
THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY ADV SRI.K.K.RAVINDRANATH, ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL
OTHER PRESENT:
GP M.M. JASMIN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.11.2022, ALONG WITH WA.1515/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT [WA Nos.1515/2019, 1523/2019]
S.V.BHATTI, J.
M/s Poonam Grihanirman(P)Ltd./Writ Petitioner is the appellant and the appeals are filed against the common judgment dated 11.1.2019 in Writ Petition Nos.21184 of 2018 and 35489 of 2018. 2. We have heard Mr.Govindan E.P., learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Jasmin M.M., learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The prayers in Writ Petition No.21184 of 2018 are considered for disposing of both the appeals. The appellant filed W.P.(C)No.21184 of 2018 for the following reliefs: i. To call for the records leading to Ext.P1 & P2 revised assessment orders passed by the first respondent assessing authority u/s.25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or by issuing any other appropriate writ, order or direction. ii. To declare that the first respondent assessing authority
have no jurisdiction to issue any notice or pass any assessment orders, penalty orders etc. under the provision of Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 after 15.09.2017 in view of clause 19 of the 101 Constitution Amendment Act, 2016. iii. To declare that the first respondent who is appointed as an assessing authority under Kerala Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 have no jurisdiction to pass any assessment orders under the repealed KVAT Act, 2003. iv. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the first respondent assessing authority to accept Exts.P10 & P11 form 20H declarations produced by the petitioner company. v. To pass appropriate orders staying all further action in pursuance of Exts.P1 and P2 revised assessment orders passed by the first respondent assessing authority. vi. To declare that the petitioners are not liable to pay any interest for the period prior to service of demand notice. vii. To issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.“
Referring to the instructions received from the appellant, Adv.Govindan does not press writ prayer Nos.i,ii,iii,v,vi and vii. The prayer covered by Sl.No.iv is pressed, and the submission made by the counsel is that the appellant in due compliance with the requirement of the Act and the Rules has placed Form 20H declaration before the Assessing Officer, which according to him are fully compliant with all the formalities required for
acceptance of declaration filed in Form 20H. Without referring to the compliance status, by referring to a few figures which are not compatible with the turnovers undertaken by the appellant, notice under Section 25(1) has been issued. The limited prayer he makes is to direct the Assessing Officer to receive the declarations filed in Form 20H by the appellant for the respective years, verify the details contained in the respective declarations and give the benefit of deduction, as the case may be, to the appellant. 5. Smt.Jasmin appearing for the respondents states that there ought not to be any difficulty in receiving the declarations filed in Form 20H, but acceptance of the declarations filed by a dealer is a matter of verification, subject to giving that liberty to the officer, the officer could be directed to receive Form 20H declarations from the appellant and orders as are deemed necessary and correct may be passed. 6. We take note of the limited objection pointed out by the
counsel appearing for the State and we are not examining to what extent the declarations now sought to be filed by the appellant should be accepted by the Assessing Officer. However, when the Assessing Officer sits in his own chair, he is expected to look at respective declarations from the perspective in which the declarations are examined to record a finding on the entitlement and give what is due to the assessee/dealer. The dealer is given liberty to submit or resubmit the declarations by enclosing a copy of this judgment within four weeks from today.
With the above observations, the Writ Appeals stand disposed of.
Sd/- S.V.BHATTI, JUDGE
Sd/- BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE
css/
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shri. Adbul Rahim vs. The State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 13 Nov 2026
- Sandhyarani Das vs. The Superintendent Of CGST And Central ExciseOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- M/S.Pitabas Jena,Pokharigaon, Cuttack vs. Supernitendent, Cuttack-Iii, Range, CuttackOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- Sudarshan Behera vs. Superintendent Angul Circle, AngulOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
- Gayatri Priyadarshini Bisoi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Cuttack-Ii,Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 11 Nov 2026
