Ce-Biotee (Private)Limited v. Commercial Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35459 of 2015 (F) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :

-------------------------- CE-BIOTECH (PRIVATE)LIMITED, CE PE POWER, TANA, IRINJALAKUDA, PIN- 680 121, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SMT.SHEEBA KURIAKKOSE.

BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S) :

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

1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN- 680 121.

2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR- 682 003.

3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (RR), IRINJALAKUDA, PIN- 680 121.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.RENJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

WP(C).No. 35459 of 2015 (F) ------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

----------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 11.09.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 22.10.2015 AGAINST EXT.P1.

EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF STAY PETITION 20.11.2015 IN EXT.P2 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF RR NOTICE DATED 28.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 35459 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 23st day of November, 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.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 stay petition before the 2nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even before the consideration of the stay petition by the 2nd respondent, recovery steps have been initiated against him through Ext.P4 revenue recovery notice, for recovery of the amount confirmed in the assessment 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.P3 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. Coercive steps for

-2W.P.(C). No. 35459 of 2015 recovery against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P4, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 2nd respondent passes orders, as directed, in Ext.P3 stay petition and communicates the same to the petitioner.

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /23.11.15