Kerala High Court
M/S Parle Agro Pvt Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner ... on 10 June, 2016
Author: A.M. Shaffique
Bench: A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/25TH SRAVANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 26940 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
M/S PARLE AGRO PVT LTD
5/188 MEPPARAMBA PIRAYIRI P.O., PALAKKAD,
MUMBAI-400 099, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
ACCOUNTS SIVAKUMAR CHAKKITIYIL THAZHATHETHIL.
BY ADV. SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT)
SPECIAL CIRCLE COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678005.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
COMMERCIAL TAXES KOTTAYAM AT ERNAKULAM-682 015.
3. THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PALAKKAD 678005.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.P. PRADEEP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
bp
WP(C).No. 26940 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER
NO.32090580088/APRIL 2016 ISSUED BY THE
ASSITANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), PALAKKAD
DATED 10.6.2016.
EXHIBIT P2: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF ORDER IN KVATA 1976/2016
DATED 28.5.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL
FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD
RESPONDENT FOR 2010-1 DATED 26.7.2016.
EXHIBIT P4: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT FOR
APRIL 2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
bp
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.26940 of 2016
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this, the 16th day of August, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner has filed Ext.P3 appeal before the 3rd respondent and along with the appeal, petitioner has also filed Ext.P4 application for stay. It is submitted that during the pendency of the appeal, steps are being taken by the respondent authorities for recovering the amount pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order.
2. Having regard to the fact that an appeal is pending before the competent authority, I do not think it necessary to consider the matter on merits. Suffice to say that the appellate authority has to consider the stay petition on merits within a specified time and in the meantime, the recovery can be kept in abeyance.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under:
(i) The 3rd respondent shall consider the stay petition filed along with the appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
(ii) In the meantime, the demand made pursuant to Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE AV