Ashraf v. The Commercial Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 36571 of 2015 (V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------------- ASHRAF, PROPRIETOR, GOLDER ALUMINIUM CENTRE, CONVENT ROAD, ERNAKULAM.

BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.FIROZ SMT.M.SHAJNA SRI.S.KANNAN SMT.UMMUL FIDA RESPONDENT(S):

------------------------- 1.

THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT CIRCLE - III, ERNAKULAM - 682 015.

2.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM - 682 015.

3.

THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682 030.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.RANJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

WP(C).No. 36571 of 2015 (V) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

-------------------------------------- EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 UNDER THE KVAT ACT DTD.19.9.2015.

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION DTD.21.10.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-1010 UNDER THE KVAT ACT BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF REVENUE RECOVERY ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 DTD.17.11.2015. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

----------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE Msv/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 36571 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the KVAT Act. Against Ext.P1 assessment order 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 by issuing Ext.P4 demand notice for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner. 2.

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

3.

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

-2W.P.(C). No. 36571 of 2015 of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for further action. sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /3.12.15