Kerala High Court
K.C.T.Steels (P) Ltd vs Asst.Commissioner (Kvat) on 14 August, 2008
Author: K.M.Joseph
Bench: K.M.Joseph
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23882 of 2008(R)
1. K.C.T.STEELS (P) LTD., NALLEPPULLY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. ASST.COMMISSIONER (KVAT),
... Respondent
2. ASST.COMMISSIONER
3. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY),
For Petitioner :SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :14/08/2008
O R D E R
K. M. JOSEPH, J.
--------------------------------------
W.P.C. NO. 23882 OF 2008 R
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th August, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a Private Limited Company. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:
Petitioner is a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and also under the Central Sales Tax Act. The Managing Director was not keeping well during 2005 - 2006. The business was run through the employees. According to petitioner, it appears that the employees connived with some retired Directors. Exts.P2 to P5 are produced in support of the case of the petitioner in this regard. Petitioner points out that one Shri C. Lalaji had grabbed the ownership of the Company through fraud. They could not take physical possession except after arrest of Shri C. Lalaji. Assessment has been completed by Ext.P7. The admitted tax, according to petitioner, is Rs.29,64,765/=. Petitioner could not file Appeal, it is stated, due to financial crisis. Ext.P9 is produced which is the WPC.23882/08 R 2 Judgment of a Division Bench of this Court wherein the Court has directed reconnection of power supply on condition that the petitioner remits Rs.50 Lakhs each in two instalments. Now the petitioner is faced with Ext.P11 attachment. Ext.P12 is produced to show that the value of the property is in the region of Rs.5 Crores. Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext. P7 assessment order and Ext.P11 attachment notice.
2. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. Counsel for petitioner reiterates the contentions in the Writ Petition. Government Pleader points out that there is evidence to show that the business was being carried on even after 2005. These are all factual matters which I feel, would be better adjudicated in preferring Appeal.
3. After having heard the parties, I feel that the petitioner should be relegated to prefer Appeal against Ext.P7. Petitioner is granted one month's time from today to prefer Appeal. WPC.23882/08 R 3 Petitioner is also given two months' time to pay the admitted tax. Petitioner should pay the first instalment consisting of Rs.15 Lakhs (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) along with the Appeal and it should also pay the balance amount of admitted tax within one month of filing the Appeal. If the petitioner files Appeal as accompanied by the first instalment and also pays the balance amount as aforesaid, the Appeal will be considered on merits after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner also. Upon the petitioner filing the Appeal as aforesaid and also paying the first instalment, petitioner will be permitted to continue the operations. This will be on a further condition that the petitioner will not alienate or transfer in any manner any of its assets to any person till the disposal of the Appeal. It is also ordered that the petitioner will not induct any stranger in the management of the Company or do anything which will reduce the value of the assets. It is further ordered that the petitioner will be entitled to the benefit of this Judgment only if the petitioner files an Undertaking before this Court incorporating WPC.23882/08 R 4 the conditions ordered as aforesaid within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. It is open to the petitioner to move the appellate authority seeking interim relief upon the petitioner remitting the entire admitted tax.
Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.
// True Copy// PS to Judge