Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

M/S. Sky High Motors Private Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner Ii on 30 April, 2012

Author: Antony Dominic

Bench: Antony Dominic

       

  

  

 
 
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT:

               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

       WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/8TH PHALGUNA 1934

                      WP(C).No. 5451 of 2013 (F)
                       --------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
---------------

       M/S. SKY HIGH MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,
       MANATHUMANGALAM, PERINTHALMANNA
       REP. BY P.UNNIKRISHNAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR.

       BY ADV. SRI.P.RAGHUNATH

RESPONDENT(S):
---------------

          1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER II,
             DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE
             MALAPPURAM-676 504.

          2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),
             DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, SALES TAX COMPLEX
             KOCHI-680004.

          3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
             DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, MINI CIVIL STATION
             MALAPPURAM AT MANJERI-676 121.

       BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

        THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)    HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC NO.5451/13
                               APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS


EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER KVAT ACT FOR JUNE, 2011
DATED 30.4.2012.

EXHIBIT P2: PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P1.

EXHIBIT  P3:  PHOTOCOPY  OF  STAY  PETITION  FILED  BEFORE  THE  SECOND
RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4: PHOTOCOPY OF CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED ALONG WITH
EXT.P2 APPEAL.

EXHIBIT P5: PHOTOCOPY OF PENALTY ORDER U/S 64(1)(D) FOR JUNE, 2011
DATED 30.4.2012.

EXHIBIT P6: PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P5 ORDER.

EXHIBIT  P7:  PHOTOCOPY  OF  STAY  PETITION  FILED  BEFORE  THE  SECOND
RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8: PHOTOCOPY OF CONDONATION APPLICATION FILED APPLICATION
FILED ALONG WITH EXT.P6 APPEAL.

EXHIBIT P9: PHOTOCOPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER KVAT ACT - AUGUST 2011
DATED 1.5.2012.

EXHIBIT P10: PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P9.

EXHIBIT  P11:  PHOTOCOPY  OF  STAY  PETITION  FILED  BEFORE  THE  SECOND
RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P12: PHOTOCOPY OF    PENALTY ORDER U/S 67(1)(D) FOR AUG, 2011
DATED 1.5.2012.

EXHIBIT P13: PHOTOCOPY OF APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT.P12 ORDER.

EXHIBIT  P14:  PHOTOCOPY  OF  STAY  PETITION  FILED  BEFORE  THE  SECOND
RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P15: PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED
11.2.2013.

EXHIBIT P16: PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE U/S 7 OF RR ACT BY THIRD RESPONDENT.


                            //True Copy//


                                         PA to Judge
Rp



                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
                    W.P.(C) NO. 5451 OF 2013
                  ===================

           Dated this the 27th day of February, 2013

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is an assessee under the KVAT Act. Exts.P1 and P9 are the assessment orders passed against the petitioner for June and August, 2011. Similarly Exts.P5 and P12 penalty orders were also issued concerning the same period. Challenging the aforesaid assessment orders and penalty orders, petitioner filed Exts.P2, P6, P10 and P13 appeals before the 2nd respondent. Along with the appeals, petitioner filed Exts.P3, P7, P11 and P14 stay petitions. It is also seen that Exts.P2 and P6 appeals filed against Exts.P1 and P9 assessment orders were belated and therefore the petitioner filed Exts.P4 and P8 applications to condone 38 days delay. The appeals and the other applications are pending consideration of the 2nd respondent. In the meanwhile, the tax and penalty due under the assessment and penalty orders are sought to be recovered by Exts.P15 and P16 notices issued under the Revenue Recovery Act. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed.

2. Exts.P2 and P6 appeals can be considered only if the WPC.No.5451/13 :2 : delay is condoned as prayed for in Exts.P4 and P8. Therefore, I direct the appellate authority to pass orders on Exts.P4 and P8 within four weeks from today and if delay is condoned, the appellate authority shall consider Exts.P2 and P6 appeals within three months from today. Further, Exts.P10 and P13 appeals shall also be disposed of within the aforesaid period of three months.

3. It is directed that, in the meanwhile, recovery of the tax and penalty due under the assessment and penalty orders will stand stayed subject to the petitioner remitting 1/3rd of the amount due thereunder and furnishing security for the balance in terms of the rules. The remittance shall be made and security shall be furnished within two weeks from today.

4. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp