M/S. DHARANI FERTILISERS V. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/16866/2017

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Dharani Fertilisers, represented by its proprietress Annapoorni R., who challenged the recovery steps taken by the respondents under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. The petitioner had initially received an assessment order (Ext.P1) confirming certain tax liabilities, which was followed by an appellate order (Ext.P2) and subsequently an appeal (Ext.P3) and stay petition (Ext.P4) filed with the 3rd respondent. Before the stay petition was considered, recovery actions were initiated by the respondents, leading to the issuance of a prohibitory order (Ext.P5). The petitioner sought relief from the High Court to halt these recovery actions pending the decision on the stay petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 726957 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Kerala Value Added Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: V K SHAMSUDHEEN; S EASWARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: K J ABRAHAM; NIKHIL JOHN; CHERIAN PUNNOSE
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Prohibitory order; Recovery Steps; Stay Petition
• Section: 32080918735/10-11

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAY ASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2017/2ND JYAISHTA, 1939 WP(C).No. 16866 of 2017 (G) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : ------------------------- M/S. DHARANI FERTILISERS, VELLANGALLUR, THRISSUR - 680 662. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRESS ANNAPOORNI.R. BY ADVS. SRI.K.J.ABRAHAM SRI.NIKHIL JOHN SRI.CHERIAN PUNNOOSE RESPONDENT(S) : ----------------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, IV CIRCLE, THRISSUR - 682 004. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR - 680 004. 3. THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX/AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & SALES TAX, ADDL. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NURANI P.O., PALAKKAD-678 004. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, IRINJALAKUDA - 680 125. 5. THE DY. BRANCH MANAGER. STATE BANK OF INDIA, PB NO.32, MAIN ROAD, IRINJALAKUDA-680 121. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN R5 BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Msd. WP(C).No. 16866 of 2017 (G) ------------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32080918735/10-11 DATED 25.10.2016. EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER IN KVAT A 936/16 DATED 26.12.2016. EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM 31 DATED 17.04.2017. EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND STAY PETITION DATED 17.04.2017. EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PROHIBITORY ORDER DATED 19.05.2017. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE. Msd. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.16866 of 2017(G) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2017 JUDGMENT Against Ext. P1 assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the appellate authority. Ext.P2 is the order of the appellate authority. Aggrieved by the order of the appellate authority, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal together with Ext.P4 stay petition before the 3rd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even prior to considering the stay petition, recovery steps are taken by the respondents against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner by the assessment order through the issuance of Ext.P5 prohibitory order by the 4th and 5th respondents. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions: i) The 3rd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 stay petition within a period W.P.(c).No.16866 of 2017 : 2 : of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. ii) Recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order including further steps pursuant to Ext.P5 prohibitory order shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed by the 3rd respondent as directed above. Iii) I make it clear that during the period when the stay order passed by this Court is in force, the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the bank account covered by Ext.P5. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/ "