Kerala High Court
Alex C.A vs Commercial Tax Officer on 16 January, 2012
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/27TH KARTHIKA, 1936
WP(C).No. 30515 of 2014 (L)
------------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
------------------------
ALEX C.A., AGED 33 YEARS,
PROPRIETOR, M/S.JOB BROTHERS & SONS, MAIN ROAD,
KOTTAPPADY, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 505.
BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL
RESPONDENT(S) :
--------------------------
1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 506.
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(APPEALS),
COMMERCIAL TAXES, WEST FORT, THRISSUR-680 003.
3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR-680 121.
4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR),
TALUK OFFICE, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 506.
BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 18-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 30515 of 2014 (L)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF ORIGINAL E-RETURN DATED 16.01.2012 FOR
THE MONTH DECEMBER 2011,MADE BY THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF COMPOUNDING PROCEEDINGS DATED 02.02.2012 OF
THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.IV, THRISSUR FOR
THE YEAR 2011-2012 U/S.74 OF THE KVAT ACT
EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF REVISED E-RETURN DATED 16.02.2012 FOR
THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 2011, WHEREIN CONCEDED
THE TURNOVER SUPPRESSION DETECTED IN EXT.P2, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SEC.22(10)TO THE KVAT ACT.
EXT.P3(A): TRUE COPY OF E-RETURN DATED 16.02.2012 FOR THE MONTH OF
JANAURY 2012, WHEREIN CONCEDED TURNOVER SUPPRESSION
DETECTED IN EXT.P2, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEC.22(10) TO
THE KVAT ACT.
EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE U/S.25(1)DATED 15.05.2013 ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR 2011-12, ON
THE BASIS OF TURNOVER REVISED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.10.2013 COMPLETED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 UNDER THE KVAT
ACT,WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE REPLY FILED.
EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 17.03.2014,SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT, AGAINST EXT.P5
ASSESSMENT FOR 2011-12 UNDER THE KVAT ACT.
EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 17.03.2014 SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH EXT.P6 APPEAL, BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 24.06.2014 U/S. 7 TO THE RR ACT,IN
FORM NO.1 SERVED ON THE PETITIONER, BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT,
PURSUANT TO EXT.P5 ASSESSMENT.
EXT.P8(A): TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 24.06.2014 U/S.34 OF THE RR ACT,IN
FORM NO.10 SERVED ON THE PETITIONER, BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT, PURSUANT TO EXT.P5 ASSESSMENT.
EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 22.07.2014 IN
W.P.(C).NO.18584 OF 2014(W) DIRECTING THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO
PASS ORDERS IN EXT.P7 STAY PETITION WITHIN ATIME LIMIT.
EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF CONDITIONAL STAY ORDER NO.KVATA 115/2014
DATED 04.09.2014, DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO SATISFY 30% OF
DISPUTED AMOUNT AND TO FURNISH SECURITY FOR BALANCE
DISPUTED AMOUNT, WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY REASON.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
-----------------------------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C) No. 30515 of 2014
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 18th day of November, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is challenging the correctness and sustainability of the condition imposed by this Court, vide Ext. P10 order dated 04.09.2014, directing him to satisfy 30 % of the disputed liability so as to enjoy the benefit of interim stay during pendency of appeal.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had filed Ext.P1 return for the month of December 2011 and subsequently the offence levelled against the petitioner was sought to be compounded as borne by Ext. P2. In the course of further proceedings, the petitioner paid tax and such other amounts payable under the relevant provisions of law and filed revised return, as borne by Exts. P3/P3(a). In view of the said course and events, according to the petitioner, no further proceeding can be pursued against the petitioner; in spite of which, the first respondent mulcted huge liability upon the petitioner alleging some unaccounted purchase, as per Ext. P5. Being aggrieved of Ext. P5, the petitioner filed Ext. P6 W.P.(C) No. 30515 of 2014 : 2 : appeal along with Ext. P7 petition for stay. In view of Exts. P8 and P8(a) series notices, the petitioner had approached this Court earlier, by filing W.P.(C) No. 18584 of 2014, which was disposed of as per Ext. P9, directing the appellate authority to consider I.A. for stay. It was accordingly that Ext. P10 order came to be passed, imposing the condition as aforesaid.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, but for referring to the contentions raised by the petitioner, absolutely no reason has been stated in Ext. P10 order.
5. Going by the contents of Ext. P10 order, it is seen that said order has been passed without proper discussion or application of mind. In the said circumstances, this Court finds that the matter requires to be reconsidered. Accordingly, Ext. P10 stands set aside. The second respondent is directed to reconsider Ext. P7 stay petition and to pass a speaking order, as directed vide Ext. P9 judgment. The proceedings as above shall be finalized, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings, if any, shall be kept in abeyance till such time.
W.P.(C) No. 30515 of 2014 : 3 :
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for further steps.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd