M/S.GLENMORE RESORTS vs. STATE TAX OFFICER (IB),

WP(C)/24640/2019HC KeralaKLHC01063796201918 September 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, having perused the relevant documents (Exts. P1, P1(a), P2, P2(a), P3, and P3(a)), was prima facie satisfied that a case was made out for issuing necessary directions to the 2nd respondent (Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)) to dispose of the stay petitions. The Court noted the limited prayer and the grounds presented by the petitioner. Consequently, the Court directed the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the stay applications (Exts. P3 and P3(a)) as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of the judgment. Additionally, the respondents were directed not to take coercive steps or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from the date of the judgment. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Glenmore Resorts, filed appeals (Exts. P2 and P2(a)) against assessment orders (Exts. P1 and P1(a)) passed under the KTL Act. Along with these appeals, the petitioner filed stay petitions (Exts. P3 and P3(a)). The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction for the appellate authority (2nd respondent) to consider and dispose of these stay petitions expeditiously. The petitioner argued that the delay in deciding the stay petitions allows the assessing officer to initiate recovery proceedings, potentially rendering the statutory appeals ineffective. The petitioner emphasized that the law mandates prompt disposal of stay applications to protect the appellant's interest pending appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should direct the appellate authority to expeditiously consider and dispose of stay petitions filed along with appeals against assessment orders under the KTL Act? Assessee's Contentions: - The mere filing or pendency of an appeal does not automatically grant a stay. - Delay in disposing of stay petitions allows the assessing officer to take recovery steps, which can render the statutory appeal academic or ineffective. - The law requires expeditious disposal of stay petitions to protect the interest of the appellant during the pendency of the appeal. Revenue's Contentions: - No specific contentions are 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 S.V.BHATTI WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 27TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.24640 OF 2019 PETITIONER/S: M/S.GLENMORE RESORTS NEAR RECREATION CLUB, PALLIVASAL, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY K.SUBEESH KUMAR, MANAGING PARTNER. BY ADVS. SRI.P.S.SOMAN SMT.T.RADHAMANY RESPONDENT/S:

STATE TAX OFFICER (IB), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, NAGAMPADAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686002.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, NAGAMPADAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-686002.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX, IDUKKI AT KATTAPPANA-685508. GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.24640 OF 2019 -2- JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeals in Exts.P2 and P2(a) aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Exts.P1 and P1(a) made under the KTL Act. The petitioner has filed the appeals with Exts.P3 and P3(a) stay petitions. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P3 and P3(a) expeditiously. 2. The case of petitioner is that either the mere filing of appeal or mere pendency of appeal does not amount to granting stay by the appellate authority. The delay in considering and disposing of Exts.P3 and P3(a) results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Ext.P2 and P2(a). The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeal would become either academic or ineffective. It is further contended by the petitioner that in the manner the law provides for protecting the interest of appellant pending appeal, the orders on stay petition are passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition.

WP(C).No.24640 OF 2019 -3- 3. Perused Exts. P1, P1(a), P2, P2(a), P3 and P3(a). Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to 2nd respondent to dispose of the stay petitions in Exts.P3 and P3(a). Having regard to the limited prayer and the grounds referred to above, this Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by this order: (a) The appellate authority/2nd respondent considers and disposes of Exts.P3 and P3(a) applications as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. (b) The respondents are directed not to take coercive steps or recover the amounts determined in the orders under appeal for ten weeks from today. Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS

WP(C).No.24640 OF 2019 -4- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32063486062/2015-16 DATED 16.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16. EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32063486062/2016-17 DATED 16.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2016-17. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 03.06.2019. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT P1(A) ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 03.06.2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED TAX FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 ORDER DATED 03.06.2019. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED TAX FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P1(A) ORDER DATED 03.06.2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DEMANDING THE ASSESSED TAX IN EXHIBIT P1 ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 30.08.2019. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DEMANDING THE ASSESSED TAX IN EXHIBIT P1(A) ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 30.08.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →