M/S.VALLUVANAD HOSPITAL COMPLEX LTD. V. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER I, OTTAPALAM

WP(C)/26751/2018

AI Insights

The case involves M/S Valluvanad Hospital Complex Ltd, represented by its chairman, Dr. M. Ramakrishnan, who filed a writ petition against the Commercial Tax Officer I and other respondents concerning multiple assessment orders under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The petitioner challenged the assessment orders for various assessment years and sought a stay on the coercive actions pending the decision on these appeals. The High Court of Kerala, presided by Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu, heard the petition and decided to defer any coercive measures until the stay petitions were addressed by the appellate authority.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 726901 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: THUSHARA JAMES
• Assessee Lawyers: T M SREEDHARAN; V P NARAYANAN; R BHASKARA KRISHNAN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Coercive Steps; KVAT; Procedural fairness; Stay Petition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1940 WP(C).No. 26751 of 2018 ------------------------ PETITIONER ----------- M/S.VALLUVANAD HOSPITAL COMPLEX LTD, KANIAMPURAM, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 679104, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DR. M.RAMAKRISHNAN. BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER I, COMMERCIAL TAXES, OTTAPALAM - 679101. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 678001. 3. THE KERALA VAT/AGRL. INCOME TAX & SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, CHEROOTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673032, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 678001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.V. WP(C).No. 26751 of 2018 (T) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ASST. ORDER DATED 24.3.2015 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ASST. ORDER DATED 16.1.2016 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF ASST. ORDER DATED 16.1.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2012-13 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ASST. ORDER DATED 22.4.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ASST. ORDER DATED 22.4.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15 ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 17.4.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-10. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 17.4.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-11. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 24.4.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 17.4.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF APPELLATE ORDER DATED 17.4.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2009-2010. EXHIBIT P11(A) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST.YEAR 2009-2010. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-2011. EXHIBIT P12(A) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2010-2011. WP(C).No. 26751 of 2018 (T) --------------------------- EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2012-2013. EXHIBIT P13(A) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2012-2013. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-2014. EXHIBIT P14(A) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-2014. EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-2015. EXHIBIT P15(A) TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 13.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2014-2015. EXHIBIT P16 COPY OF THE STATEMENT CONTAINING THE PARTICULARS OF DEMAND FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND THE PART PAYMENT MADE AND BALANCE OUTSTANDING FURNISHED. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------- /TRUE COPY/ K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE 10.08.2018 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. ============================================== W.P.(C). No. 26751 of 2018 (T) ======================================================= Dated this the 7th day of August, 2018 JUDGMENT 2. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act') on the rolls of the 1st respondent, questioned the Exts.P1 to P5 assessment orders, before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner has also filed stay petitions in the appeals. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petitions, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 4. I reckon the petitioner has exercised on time his statutory remedy of filing appeals. It appears that he has also filed stay petitions. Procedural fairness demands that the authorities may wait, before taking further -2- W.P.(C). No. 26751 of 2018(T) steps, until the appellate authority decides on the stay petitions. 5. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the 2nd respondent considers the stay petitions. I also hope that the 2nd respondent will dispose of the stay petitions expeditiously. Sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE das 7.08.2018 "