Kerala High Court
M/S. Parle Agro Private Limited vs Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) on 30 July, 2016
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/29TH JYAISHTA, 1939
WP(C).No. 20087 of 2017 (I)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------
M/S. PARLE AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED,
5/188 MEPPARAMBA PIRAYARI P.O.,
PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED B ITS
MANAGER ACCOUNTS C.T. SIVAKUMAR
CHAKKITTIYIL THAZHATHETHIL.
BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT),
SPECIAL CIRCLE COMMERCIAL TAXES,
PALAKKAD.678004.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT),
COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 678004.
3. THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD 678004.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI SHAMSUDHEEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
K.V.
WPC 20087 OF 2017:
------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:
---------------------
P1; PHOTOSTAT COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER NO 3200580088/2015-16 ISSUED
BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), PALAKKAD
DATED 30/7/2016.
P2: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF ORDER IN KAVAT 125/2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT DATED 12/4/2017.
P3; PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE M MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT FOR 2015-16
DATED 10/6/2017.
P4; PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE STAT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE RESPONDENT FOR 2015-16.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
-----------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
K.V.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No.20087 of 2017
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2017
JUDGMENT
Against Ext. P1 assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. By Ext.P2 first appellate order, the appeal was dismissed. The petitioner therefore preferred Ext.P3 second appeal together with Ext.P4 stay petition before the 3rd respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, in the light of a Supreme Court judgment, rendered in the matter of classification of the product in question, the appeal preferred by the petitioner will now have to be allowed by the tribunal.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, and taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:
i) The 3rd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. W.P.(c).No.20087 of 2017 : 2 :
ii) Recovery steps for recovery of the balance amounts confirmed against petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed by the 3rd respondent as directed above.
iii) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this judgment, before the 3rd respondent, for further action.
.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/