Mohammed Rasheed v. The Commercial Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/22ND ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 31279 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

------------------ MOHAMMED RASHEED, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMMADALY, PROPRIOTOR, M/S. SURYA PLYWOOD CENTRE, CHERUPLASSERRY ROAD, MARUTHUR, PLAKKAD DISTRICT RESIDING AT KOTTOPADAM, MANNARKAD THALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.NAVAS SRI.T.K.SASIKUMAR RESPONDENTS :

----------------------

1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), ERNAKULAM - 682017.

3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 675011.

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KTTAPPADAM VILLAGE, - I, MANNARKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 675011.

5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, MANNARKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 675011.

6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PALAKKAD - 675001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LILLY K.T.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

bp

WP(C).No. 31279 of 2015 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

P1:

COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO. 32091103563/2012-13 DT 8/7/2015. P2:

COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DT 8/7/2015.

P3:

COPY OF THE STATUTORY APPEAL DT 17/8/2015.

P4:

COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DT 17/8/2015.

P5:

COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE NO. NIL DT 28/9/2015 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE RR ACT.

P6:

COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. A2-2965/15 DT NIL.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :

NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE bp

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 31279 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 14th day of October, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, hereinafter referred to as the "KVAT Act'. Against Ext.P1 order of assessment passed under the KVAT Act, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that even before considering the stay petition, the respondents are taking steps to recover the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 order.

2.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition, preferred by the petitioner before him, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1

-2W.P.(C). No. 31279 of 2015 order, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 2nd respondent passes orders, as directed, in Ext.P4 stay petition and communicates the same to the petitioner.

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /14.10.15