Kerala High Court
By Advs.Sri.Harisankar vs By Advs.Sri.Harisankar V. Menon
Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 5TH MAGHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 2670 of 2018
PETITIONER
O.C. SADANANDAN
M/S. MALANAD GRANITES, MOOVATTY, KOZHUTHANA P.O,
WAYANAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
SMT.MEERA V.MENON
SMT.K.KRISHNA
RESPONDENTS:
1. THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER
VYTHIRI AT KALPETTA 673 121.
2. THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
KOZHIKODE 673 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER:SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-01-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 2670 of 2018 (G)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE IST
RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15, DATED 18.12.15.
EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER [APPEALS], WAYANAD, DATED 17.2.17.
EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.8.17.
EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF DELAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.8.17.
EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.8.17.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
rsr
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.2670 of 2018
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of January, 2018
JUDGMENT
Challenging Ext.P2 appellate order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal. There was a delay of 72 days in filing the appeal. Ext.P4 is the application preferred by the petitioner for condoning the delay in filing the appeal and Ext.P5 is the application preferred by the petitioner in the appeal for stay. It is stated that proceedings have already been initiated for realisation of the amounts covered by the order impugned in the appeal. The grievance of the petitioner, in the circumstances, concerns the delay in disposing of the appeal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.
Since the delay in filing the appeal is only 72 days, W.P.(c).No.2670 of 2018 :2: having regard to the peculiar facts of this case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the Tribunal to condone the delay in filing the appeal and pass orders on the application for stay, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that till orders are passed on the application for stay, further proceedings for realization of the amounts covered by the order impugned in the appeal shall be deferred by the respondents concerned.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE rsr