Disposed

Mcdowell & Co.Ltd,Cherthala v. Asst.Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Kerala HC20 Mar 2007OP/1455/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged assessment orders. The Court held that since an appeal lies under the K.G.S.T. Act, the Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to invoke the appellate remedy within one month, excluding the pendency period from limitation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to invoke statutory appellate remedy within one month; Original Petition otherwise disposed.

Mcdowell & Co.Ltd,Cherthala Vs Asst.Commissioner of… — GST and Indirect Tax | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2007 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1928

¶5

OP.No. 1455 of 2001(W)

PETITIONER:

M/S. MCDOWELL AND COMPANY LIMITED, VARANAD, CHERTHALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER - ACCOUNTS, MR.J.ANANTHARAMAN.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ASSMT.) SPECIAL CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA.

¶14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA.

¶15

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ.

¶17

THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/03/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

APPENDIX ( OP NO.1455/2001)

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXTS.

¶20

EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR 90-91 (CST) DT. 30.6.97 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶21

EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR 91-92 DT. 23.1.98 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶22

EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 27.6.2000 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶23

EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 90-91 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 30.9.2000.

¶24

EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR 91-92 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 30.9.2000.

¶25

/TRUE COPY/

¶26

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.

¶27

O.P. NO. 1455 OF 2001-W

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner challenges Exts.P4 and P5 assessment orders. Against those orders, the petitioner can file appeal before the statutory appellate authority under the K.G.S.T. Act. In view of the above position, it is unnecessary to hear the O.P on merits. If the petitioner has not, so far, invoked the appellate remedy, it may invoke the same within one month from today. In that event, the period this Original Petition was pending before this Court shall be excluded, while computing the period of limitation, if any, in invoking the appellate remedy.

¶30

The Original Petition is disposed of as above.

¶31

20^th March, 2007. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.

¶32

Nm/

¶33

¶34

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,J.

¶35

O.P.NO.1455/2001-W

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

20.3.2007

Mcdowell & Co.Ltd,Cherthala v. Asst.Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mcdowell & Co.Ltd,Cherthala v. Asst.Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.D.Devasia Vs Rev.Fr.Msg.Mathew M.Chalil

T.Vijayan Nair Vs Sivasankar

M/S.Sadguru Marbles Vs State of Kerala

M.M.Joseph Vs P.Sajan Mathew

Cochin Refineries Balmer Lawrie Ltd. Vs Asst. Commr. of Commercial Taxes

Dr.Bikky Mammen Modayil Vs Kerala State Electricity Board & Ors.