PALAYAMKOTTIL ISMAILUDEEN SHANAVAS vs. THE STATE TAX OFFICER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI THURSDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 14TH BHADRA, 1941 WP(C).No.24226 OF 2019(C) PETITIONER: PALAYAMKOTTIL ISMAILUDEEN SHANAVAS PROPRIETOR, DEENS GROUP, FIRST FLOOR, DOOR NO. 23/130 D2, MARVEL PLAZA BUILDING, HMT ROAD, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM 683 104. BY ADVS. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SMT.K.HYMAVATHY RESPONDENTS:

THE STATE TAX OFFICER (FORMERLY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT KERALA, WORKS CONTRACT, ERNAKULAM 682 015.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 015.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM AT CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD 682 030. BY DR. THUSHARA JAMES, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No.24226 OF 2019(C) 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed appeals in Exts.P3 and P4 aggrieved by the orders of assessment in Exts.P1 and P2 made under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. The petitioner has filed the appeals with Exts.P5 and P6 stay petitions. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the appellate authority to consider and dispose of Exts.P5 and P6 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.P5 and P6 results in the assessing officer taking steps for recovering the tax amount which is under challenge in Exts.P3 and P4. The assessing officer, if is successful in his effort the statutory appeals 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 appeals, the

WP(C).No.24226 OF 2019(C) 3 orders on stay petitions are passed expeditiously. Hence the writ petition. 3. Perused Exts.P1 to P6. Prima facie I am satisfied that a case is made out for issuing necessary directions to second respondent to dispose of stay petitions in Exts. P5 and P6. 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/the second respondent considers and disposes of Exts.P5 and P6 stay petitions 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 DCS

WP(C).No.24226 OF 2019(C) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 UNDER THE KVAT ACT DATED 27.3.2018. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 UNDER THE KVAT ACT DATED 27.3.2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE THE YEAR 2011-12 DATED 30.8.2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 30.8.2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY FILED BY THE THE YEAR 2011-12 DATED 30.8.2019. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 30.8.2019. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE KERALA REVENUE ACT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 DATED 5.7.2019. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE KERALA REVENUE ACT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DATED 5.7.2019.