Sobha Ltd.(Formerly Sobha Developers ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax ... on 10 March, 2021

[Cites 1, Cited by 3]

Kerala High Court

Sobha Ltd.(Formerly Sobha Developers ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax ... on 10 March, 2021

Bench: A.M.Badar

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

   WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.6199 OF 2021(Y)


PETITIONER:

               SOBHA LTD.(FORMERLY SOBHA DEVELOPERS LTD)
               PUZHAKKAL, GURUVAYOOR ROAD, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY
               ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY V.G. VENUGOPAL.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)
               SHRI.RAHUL A.
               APARNA ANIL

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (WORKS CONTRACT)
               STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695002.

      2        THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)
               STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695002.


OTHER PRESENT:

               SMT. THUSHARA JAMES, GOVT. PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.6199/2021                2


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10th day of March 2021 Heard both sides.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 1st respondent has issued assessment order at Ext.P1 under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, for the year 2014-2015. The petitioner has challenged the same by filing an appeal at Ext.P2 along with stay petition at Ext.P3. It is submitted that the respondents are recovering the amount determined against the petitioner despite pendency of appeal as well as stay petition. The petitioner, therefore, prays that till the stay petition is decided, recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance.

3. Learned Government Pleader opposed the writ petition by contending that the assessment has been done by following due process of law.

4. Keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of the instant case, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

The 2nd respondent to decide the stay petition, Ext.P3, in the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the assessment order at W.P.(C) No.6199/2021 3 Ext.P1 within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this judgment. The petitioner to co-operate the 2nd respondent in disposal of the stay petition. Till disposal of the stay petition, respondents are directed to keep in abeyance, all recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment order at Ext.P1. The petitioner to supply copy of this judgment to the 2nd respondent for compliance.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR JUDGE smp W.P.(C) No.6199/2021 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1 : COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD.01.01.2021 ISSUED BY R1 FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. EXT.P1(a) : COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DTD.1.1.2021 ISSUED BY R1 IN RESPECT OF EXT.P1 ORDER.

EXT.P2 : COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM AGAINST EXT.P1 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : COPY OF PETITION FOR STAY FILED IN EXT.P2 APPEAL.

   RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:       NIL.



                                                           True Copy



                                                        P.S to Judge



   smp

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court