Kerala High Court
Master Fire Security Systems Pvt.Ltd vs The State Tax Officer on 6 March, 2019
Author: Dama Seshadri Naidu
Bench: Dama Seshadri Naidu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
WEDNESDAY,THE 06TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1940
WP(C).No. 6557 of 2019
PETITIONER:
MASTER FIRE SECURITY SYSTEMS PVT.LTD.,
R.F. COMPLEX, 44/2507B1,
DESHABHIMANI ROAD,44,KALOOR
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR PRAMOD KUMAR R.
BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER,
STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, II CIRCLE,
KALAMASSERY, AT CIVIL STATION, KAKKAND, PIN-682 030
2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
COMMERICAL TAXES, (NOW STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
DEPARTMENT), ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 017
3 THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 017
GOVT.PLEADER, DR. THUSHARA JAMES.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
WP(C).No. 6557 of 2019
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed a stay petition in the appeal. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time his statutory remedy of filing an appeal. It appears that he has also filed a stay petition. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petition.
Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the -3- WP(C).No. 6557 of 2019 respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2 nd respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the 2 nd respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE JS/06.03 -4- WP(C).No. 6557 of 2019 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31/01/2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21/02/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY, DATED 21/02/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-16