Kerala High Court
U.Manikandan vs The Asst. Commissioner Of State Tax on 5 December, 2017
Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAYOF DECEMBER 2017/14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939
WP(C).No. 38926 of 2017 (M)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------
U.MANIKANDAN,
MANI POULTRY FARM, ANNAMOOLI, THENKARA POST,
MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
SMT.MEERA V.MENON
SMT.K.KRISHNA
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------
1. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX,
STATE GST DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD-678001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST,
TAX TOWERS, KILLIPPALAM,
KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695005.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SHAMSUDHEEN V.K
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 05-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 38926 of 2017 (M)
----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P1(A) COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2(A) COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2(B) COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2(C) COPY OF LETTER FROM KEPCO TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE
YEAR 2011-12.
EXHIBIT P3(A) COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE
YEAR 2012-13.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS - NIL
------------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
TS
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(c) No.38926 of 2017
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 5th day of December , 2017
JUDGMENT
Exts.P3 series assessment orders issued under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (the Act), which are under challenge in the writ petition, are appealable under Section 55 of the said Act. I do not find any satisfactory reason to entertain a writ petition challenging the said orders when the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy by way of appeal under the Act.
The writ petition, in the circumstances, is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to prefer appeals against the impugned orders under Section 55 of the Act.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE bng