ELDO K.MATHEW V. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/28882/2014

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Eldo K. Mathew and M.P. Kuriakose against various state authorities concerning revenue recovery proceedings and pending rectification petitions and appeals related to the assessment years 2010-2011, 2011-2012, and 2012-2013 under the KVAT Act. The petitioners argued that the revenue recovery proceedings were initiated based on misconceived facts and while rectification petitions and appeals were pending. The court's decision focused on ensuring that the pending matters were addressed promptly and that no coercive actions were taken until the issues were resolved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 761343 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: KVAT Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SHOBA EAPEN
• Assessee Lawyers: GEORGE ABRAHAM
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Rectification petition; Revenue recovery; Writ of Certiorari; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 66

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY , THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/28TH KARTHIKA, 1936 WP(C).No.28882 of 2014 (I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ELDO K.MATHEW,MANAGING DIRECTOR, CANAAN GRANITE AND CRUSHERS PVT. LTD., POTHUKETTY,KUMBALERY P.O.,MEENANGADI, WYANAD DISTRICT. 2. M.P.KURIAKOSE,MANAGING TRUSTEE, SAMARPITHER TRUST,MATTAPPARA, KOLAGAPPARA P.O.,WYANAD DISTRICT. 3. M.P.KURIAKOSE,MUTTATH HOUSE,KALAMUZHY, CHETTAPPALAM,SULTANBATHERY ,WYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV.DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, VAT CIRCLE,KALPETTA,WYANAD DISTRICT,PIN: 673 121. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), (COMMERCIAL TAXES),KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,PIN :673 001. 3. TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), AMBALAVAYAL,SULTHANBATHERY, WYANAD DISTRICT,PIN: 673 593. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER,PADICHIRA, SULT ANBATHERY,W AYANAD DISTRICT, PIN:673579. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER,AMBALAV AYAL, WYANAD DISTRICT,PIN: 673 593. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: pk WP(C).No.28882 of 2014 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: EXT.P1:TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/7/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011. EXT.P2:TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/7/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012. EXT.P3:TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17/7/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013. EXT.P4:TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011. EXT.P5:TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012. EXT.P6:TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION PETITION IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013. EXT.P7:TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24/9/2014 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011. EXT.P8:TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24/9/2014 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012. EXT.P9:TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24/9/2014 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-2013. EXTP10:TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST PETITIONERS 1 & 2. EXT.P11:TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE 3RD PETITIONER IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY. EXT.P12:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9/10/2014 FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P13:TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITIONS FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P14:TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITIONS FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P15:TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITIONS FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// pk P.S.TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ======================== W.P.(C). No. 28882 of 2014 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of November, 2014 JUDGMENT The petitioners have approached this Court with the following prayers: “a. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing Exhibits P10 and P11 revenue recovery proceedings. b. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to consider Exhibits P4 to P6 rectification petitions filed by petitioners 1 and 3. c. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 2nd respondent to consider Exhibits P7, P8 and P9 appeals filed by the 2nd petitioner. d. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondent 3 to 5 to desist from taking any action against the petitioners under revenue recovery proceedings” The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the second petitioner is not connected with the affairs of the 1st petitioner's company and that the 3rd petitioner has not conducted any quarrying activity in his individual name. It is stated that W.P.C. No. 28882 of 2014 -2- assessment proceedings came to be finalized on misconceived facts. It is further submitted that the third respondent has no authority to initiate RR proceedings when rectification petitions filed by the petitioners 1 & 3 under Section 66 of the KVAT Act and appeals along with stay petitions filed by the 2nd petitioner are pending before the respondents 1 and 2. Prayer is for a direction to be given to the said respondents to dispose of the same. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the 1st petitioner is only the owner of the property concerned who let out the premises to the second petitioner and the grievance in this regard has already been sought to be rectified as per Exts. P4 to P6 rectification petitions which are pending consideration before the first respondent, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders therein, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one month' from the date of receipt of a copy of this W.P.C. No. 28882 of 2014 -3- judgment. The stay petitions, if any, filed along with Exts. P7 to P9 appeals shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the second respondent at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one month' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts. P10 and P11 shall be kept in abeyance till finalization of proceedings as above. The writ petition is disposed of. Petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. kp/- "