Kerala High Court
M/S.Paragon Steels Private Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner (Assmt) on 28 April, 2014
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/28TH JYAISHTA, 1936
WP(C).No. 15455 of 2014 (F)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
------------------
M/S.PARAGON STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,
NEW INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, KANJIKODE (WEST)
PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
M.PARAMASIVAN
BY ADVS.SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR
SRI.V.K.SHAMUSUDHEEN
RESPONDENTS :
----------------------
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSMT)
SPECIAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD - 678 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682 015
3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 678 001.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 18-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BP
WP(C).NO. 15455 OF 2014 (F)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT
FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 DATED 28.04.2014.
P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 DATED 12.05.2014.
P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 DATED 12.05.2014.
P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE
YEAR 2008-09 DATED 30.05.2014.
P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE IN FORM NO.12 ISSUED BY 1ST
RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2008-09 DATED 28.04.2014
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
BP
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C).No. 15455 of 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated 18th June, 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved with the order passed in the stay application filed in the appeal preferred by the petitioner. By Ext.P4, the demand for the year 2008-09 is kept in abeyance on condition of payment of 30%. Petitioner contends that the entire estimation has been made on the basis of undervaluation. The contention of the Assessing Officer looking at Ext.P1 is that a comparison of the raw material price and the price of the products sold, would bring forth undervaluation for the year; since a corresponding increase is not reflected in the valuation of the product sold by the petitioner. Since the entire estimation has been made on that account, there shall be a direction that the recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance till the first appeal is considered WP(C).15455/14 2 and disposed of. Ext.P4, hence, is set aside. The Appellate Authority shall consider the contentions raised by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, untrammelled by the observations made herein.
Writ petition disposed of.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, Judge Mrcs //True Copy// P.A. To Judge