Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 8]

Kerala High Court

P.N.R. Trading Company vs Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

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 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017/27TH BHADRA, 1939

                              WP(C).No. 29955 of 2017 (T)
                                  ----------------------------


PETITIONER:
-------------

                  P.N.R. TRADING COMPANY,
                  VALAKOM, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY
                 ITS PARTNER VISWANATHAN PILLAI.


                  BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)

RESPONDENT(S):
--------------

        1.       ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)
                  COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPL. CIRCLE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM.

        2.        THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER [APPEALS]
                  COMMERCIAL TAXES, ASRAMOM, KOLLAM 691 002.

        3.       THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                  ADDITIONAL BENCH, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
                 695 010, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY.


                  BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SHAMSUDHEEN.V.K.

            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
             ON 18-09-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
            FOLLOWING:

sdr/-

WP(C).No. 29955 of 2017 (T)
----------------------------

                                          APPENDIX
                                          --------------


PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
--------------------------------------


EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.6.15 ISSUED BY THE IST
                     RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11.

EXHIBIT P1[A]. COPY OF ORDER DATED 30.4.15 ISSUED BY THE IST
                      RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12.

EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF ORDER DATED 4.4.17 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
                    RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF EXHIBIT P1.

EXHIBIT P2[A]. COPY OF ORDER DATED 20.3.17 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
                      RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF EXT.P1[A].

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXHIBIT P2.

EXHIBIT P3[A]. COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXHIBIT P2[A].

EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONING DELAY FILED IN EXT.P3 APPEAL.

EXHIIBIT P4[A].COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONING DELAY FILED IN
                     EXHIBIT P3[A] APPEAL.

EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXHIBIT P3 APPEAL.

EXHIBIT P5[A]. COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED IN EXHIBIT P3[A] APPEAL.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
------------------------------------


                                                            /TRUE COPY/


                                                            PA TO JUDGE

sdr/-



               A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
        - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    W.P.(C) No.29955 of 2017
        - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
            Dated this the 18th day of September, 2017

                            JUDGMENT

Against Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner had preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. By Exts.P2 and P2(a) first appellate orders, the appeals were dismissed. The petitioner, therefore, preferred Exts.P3 and P3(a) second appeals together with Exts.P4 and P4(a) applications for condonation of delay and Exts.P5 and P5(a) stay petitions before the 3rd respondent. It is also stated that the delay occasioned is only of 52 days.

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 finding the explanation given by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the delay occasioned to be satisfactory, I condone the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal and dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

i) The 3rd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P5(a) stay applications W.P.(c).No.29955 of 2017 : 2 : within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.
ii) Recovery steps for recovery of the amounts confirmed against petitioner by Exts.P1 and P1(a) assessment orders, 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/