Kerala High Court
Joe I. Mangaly vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 6 January, 2026
WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019
1 2026:KER:283
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 16TH POUSHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 11800 OF 2017
PETITIONER/S:
JOE I. MANGALY,
AGED 54 YEARS
MANAGING PARTNER, MANGALY TIMBERS, BOC ROAD,
PALAKKAD-678015
BY ADVS.
SRI.RAJU JOSEPH (SR.)
SRI.C.JOSEPH ANTONY
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,
1ST CIRCLE, COMMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE, TAX COMPLEX,
PALAKKAD, PIN-678001
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TAXES,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.01.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).28849/2019, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019
2 2026:KER:283
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 16TH POUSHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 28849 OF 2019
PETITIONER/S:
MANGALY INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED
10/285,RED HILL ESTATE,KALLUKULANGARA,PALAKKAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
JOE.I. MANGALY.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)
SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER (INVESTIGATION BRANCH)
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
(INTELLIGENCE),STATE GST DEPARTMENT,
BEHIND CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-678001.
2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER,
FIRST CIRCLE,STATE GST DEPARTMENT,
BEHIND CIVIL STATION,PALAKKAD-678001.
3 THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB),
COMMERCIAL TAXES,PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDINGS,
KOTTAYAM-676001.
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.01.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).11800/2017, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019
3 2026:KER:283
COMMON JUDGMENT
Dated this the 06th day of January, 2026 These two writ petitions are with respect to certain transactions between the respective petitioners in these cases. The dispute is essentially with respect to the period March 2016 relevant for the assessment year 2015-2016. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017, made a request at Ext.P2 seeking for revision of its return for the month of March 2016, essentially with reference to certain omissions to account certain purchases, made from the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28849 of 2019. The assessing authority by Ext.P3 in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 rejected the request of revision of return essentially relying on certain investigation being carried out by Intelligence Officer. The rejection of Ext.P3 was the subject matter of challenge in W.P.(C) No.26021 of 2016 which stood dismissed by Ext.P4 judgment dated 31.08.2016. When the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 challenged the decision in W.P.(C) No.26021 of 2016 by filing WA No.1872 of 2016, a Division Bench of this Court disposed of the same, leaving open the right of the petitioner to approach the assessing authority once again, with reference to the provisions of WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019 4 2026:KER:283 Section 21(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (herein after referred to as 'Act'). On that basis, the matter was considered afresh and the 1st respondent in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 by Ext.P9 dated 23.03.2017 rejected the request for revision of return submitted as above, placing reliance on certain omissions detected by the Intelligence wing of the department as well as the steps for tax evasion being initiated against the petitioner. It is seeking to challenge Ext.P9 dated 23.03.2017, that W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 is instituted.
2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28849 of 2019-the supplier has also approached this Court seeking to challenge Ext.P5 notice proposing imposition of penalty under Section 67 of the Act, with reference to certain sale suppressions alleged against it. The submission made in this writ petition is to the effect that unless and until the challenge by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 against the rejection of the prayer for revision of return is finalised, the penal steps initiated as above shall not be proceeded further.
3. This Court, while admitting W.P.(C) No.28849 of 2019 has also stayed further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P5. WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019 5 2026:KER:283
4. I have heard Sri. Raju Joseph, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017, Sri. Rahul A., the learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28849 of 2017 and Sri. Alen Priyadarshi Dev, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents in these cases.
5. The first issue arising for consideration is with reference to the sustainability or otherwise of Ext.P9 order challenged in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017. A reading of Ext.P9 would show that the revision of return has been rejected essentially pointing out that certain tax evasion has been detected against the petitioner therein. However, the petitoner in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 has specifically averred in the writ petition that no penal steps whatsoever has been initiated against the petitioner under the provisions of the Act. On a perusal of Ext.P5 in W.P.(C) No.28849 of 2019, this Court notices that the penal steps initiated is against the petitioner therein which is a private limited company, having a seperate registration under the provisions of the Act. The initiation of steps against the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.28849 of 2019, cannot be a reason for rejection of the prayer for revision of return with respect to the petitioner in W.P.(C) WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019 6 2026:KER:283 No.11800 of 2017.
6. This Court also takes note of the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Commercial Tax Officer-I and another Vs. C.R. Varghese, [2018 (3) KLT 468], wherein this Court has categorically found that, in circumstances like the case at hand were a voluntary request for revision of return is being filed by an assessee, the same requires to be considered favourably by the assessing authority. The provisions of Section 79B of the Act were also considered by the Division Bench of this Court while rendering the afore judgment.
7. In the light of the afore, I am of the opinion that Ext.P9 challenged in W.P.(C) No.11800 of 2017 cannot be sustained. Therefore, Ext.P9 in W.P.(C) 11800 of 2017 is set aside. The 1st respondent asessing authority therein is directed to permit the petitioner to revise the return with reference to the month March 2016 as also the annual return for the assessment year 2015-2016 by enabling the online facility to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today.
8. W.P.(C)No.28849 of 2019 would also stand disposed of, in the light of the afore, however, directing that the WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019 7 2026:KER:283 steps pursuant to Ext.P5 challenged therein can be continued only after the revision of return is carried out by the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.11800 of 2017.
These writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON JUDGE SLR WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019 8 2026:KER:283 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 11800 OF 2017 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 15/6/2016 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST WAS MADE THROUGH E-MAIL AS WELL AS IN WRITING DATED 21/7/2016 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26/7/2016. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.26021 OF 2016 DATED 31/8/2016 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO. 1872 OF 2016 DATED 8/11/2016 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 29/11/2016 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 20/2/2017 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 21/3/2017 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 23/3/2017 WP(C)Nos.11800/2017 & 28849/2019 9 2026:KER:283 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 28849 OF 2019 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 2.07.2016 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 67 OF THE ACT.
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF LETTER DATED 2.12.2O16 FILED BY THE M/S.MANGALY TIMBERS BEFORE THE THIRD RESONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF LETTER DATED 2.12.2016 FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF LETTER DATED 15.05.2017 FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 03.03.2018 ISSUED BY
THE FIRST RESPONDENT U/S.67 OF THE ACT. (EXT.P5).
EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.03.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 16.03.2018
ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
W.P(c)NO.11800/2017.
EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE EXTENDED INTERIM ORDER DATED
28.05.2018 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C)NO.11800/2017.
EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF LETTER DATED 18.06.2019 FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.