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 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

M/S.Yamuna Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd vs Asst.Commissioner (Assessment) on 10 October, 2013

Author: V. Chitambaresh

Bench: V.Chitambaresh

       

  

  

 
 
                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM

                                             PRESENT:

                        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

              THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/18TH ASWINA, 1935

                                   WP(C).No. 24908 of 2013 (K)
                                       ----------------------------

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

          M/S.YAMUNA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD.
          22-A, DEVELOPMENT PLOT
          PERINGANDOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT
          REPRESENTED BY C.G. PRATHIBASMIDAN
          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

            BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
                          SMT.MEERA V.MENON


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

          1.         ASST.COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)
                     COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE
                     THRISSUR 680 001.

          2.         KERALA VALUE ADDED TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                     SALES TAX COMPLEX, THEVARA
                     ERNAKULAM 682 015.

          3.         INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER
                     DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
                     THRISSUR 680 001.

            BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
          ON 10-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO.24908/2013

                                APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS


EXHIBIT P1    : COPYT OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2006-07 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
                RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P1(a) : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2006-07 CSTR ISSUED BY THE
                1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2    : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
                RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2(a) : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
                RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3    : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2006-07 ISSUED BY THE DY.
                COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P3(a) : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2006-07 CST ISSUED BY THE DY.
                COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P4    : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 ISSUED BY THE DY.
                COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P4(a) : COPY OF ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 CST ISSUED BY THE DY.
                COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P5    : COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER.


EXHIBIT P5(a) : COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER.


EXHIBIT P6    : COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER.


EXHIBIT P6(a) : COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER.


EXHIBIT P7    : COPY OF STAYPETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER


EXHIBIT P7(a) : COPY OF STAYPETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.


EXHIBIT P8    : COPY OF STAYPETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.


EXHIBIT P8(a) : COPY OF STAYPETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.



RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL

                                                        /TRUE COPY/

                                                        P.A. TO JUDGE.



                   V. CHITAMBARESH, J
                  --------------------------------
                 WP(C) NO. 24908 OF 2013
                 ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 10th day of October, 2013


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed Ext.P5 series appeals against Exts. P3 and P4 series appellate orders. The appeals are accompanied by Exts.P7 and P8 series petitions for stay of recovery of the disputed amounts. The petitioner is apprehensive of coercive steps even before the disposal of the appeals and petitions for stay.

2. I direct the second respondent to consider Exts.P7 series and P8 series petitions with notice to the petitioner within a period of one month. The coercive steps for realisation of the amount due from the petitioner shall be put on hold in the meanwhile.

3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition with the judgment before the second respondent for compliance.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd