M/S. ODAYAM BEACH RETREATS V. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER ( LUXURY TAX)

OP (TAX)/6/2018

AI Insights

The case involves Odayam Beach Retreats, which faced assessments under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976 for the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 due to non-filing of returns and failure to produce books of accounts. The Assessing Authority made a best judgment assessment, which included penalties for suppression of taxable events. The first appeal was rejected, and the Tribunal granted a stay on the condition of paying 30% of the assessed demand. The petitioner sought further relief from the High Court, which was denied, affirming the Tribunal's conditional stay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 726917 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MOHAMMED RAFIQ
• Assessee Lawyers: S KUMAR; K S NAIR; M RAJAGOPAL
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Best Judgment Assessment; Luxury tax; Stay order
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 153A; 68

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1940 OP (TAX).No. 6 of 2018(Q) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- M/S. ODAYAM BEACH RETREATS, ODAYAM, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN:695141, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR THILAKAN V.S. BY ADVS.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER ( LUXURY TAX), TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695002. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695002. 3. KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX/AGRL. INCOME TAX & SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL. BENCH, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695010, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. SECRETARY. R1-R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ THIS OP TAX HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP (TAX).No. 6 of 2018 (Q) -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ EXHIBIT- P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.09.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. EXHIBIT- P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.09.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT- P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT- P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT- P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT-P2 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF EXT. P1. EXHIBIT- P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXT-P2 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF EXT. P1(A). EXHIBIT- P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED IN EXT-P3 APPEAL. EXHIBIT- P4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY FILED IN EXT-P3(A) APPEAL. EXHIBIT- P5 TRUE COPY OF STAY ORDER DATED 20.04.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ----------------------- NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE dkr K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ. ------------------------------------------- O.P.(Taxes) No. 6 of 2018 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of June, 2018 J U D G M E N T Vinod Chandran, J. The petitioner, who is an assessee under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976 is aggrieved with the conditional order passed by the Tribunal at Ext.P5. The petitioner had not filed monthly and annual returns during the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. The petitioner also failed to produce the books of accounts on notice being issued by the Assessing Authority. The Assessing Authority proceeded for assessment on best judgment, in which proceeding an offence detected was also taken into consideration. 50% of the actual suppression for probable omission and suppression was also made. The assessee challenged it in first appeal, which was rejected. The assessee then was before the Tribunal, in which the assessee was granted stay on condition of payment of 30% of the demand. On the facts coming out in the above case, we do not think that the assessee is entitled to a blanket stay or further OP(Taxes) 6/2018 2 indulgence than that granted by the Tribunal. We hence dismiss the Original Petition, however, directing the assessee to satisfy the 30% of the demand in two equal monthly installments on 06-07-2018 and 06-08-2018, till which time the recovery will be kept in abeyance. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN Judge Sd/- ASHOK MENON Judge dkr "