The High Court of Kerala dismissed an appeal against a single judge's order upholding the entry tax demand. The court held that payment and refund are separate concepts and tax cannot be adjusted against refundable amounts.
The writ appeal was rejected and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
FRIDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2007 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1929
WA.No. 638 of 2006()
-------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.03.2006 IN W.P.(C) 6662 OF 2006.
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
K. SODARAN, S/O. KANNAN, SREEKRISHNA NILAYAM, THAZHAMEL, ANCHAL P.O., KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR TAXES SHRI V.V. ASOKAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN,J.
W.A. No. 638 of 2006
Dated this the 8th June, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L.DATTU, C.J .
Appellant calls in question the correctness of the orders passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No.6662 of 2006 dated 7th March, 2006. While disposing of the writ petition, the learned single Judge has merely followed the judgment in W.P.(C) No.6069 of 2006 dated 1st March, 2006.
demand notice inter alia directing the appellant to pay entry tax for the two JCBs brought by him into the local area. After receipt of the demand notice, the appellant had requested the respondents to adjust the amount refundable to him towards the demand made in the demand notice. Since that request has not been considered by the respondents, appellant was before this Court in W.P.(C) No.6662 of 2006. Learned Judge had rejected the writ petition following the judgment in W.P.(C) No.6069 of 2006.
.W.A. NO.638 OF 2006
:: 2 ::
approach them with appropriate representation/application and if, for any reason, the request so made is rejected, he has to approach the appropriate forum for refund of the amount. The Act does not contemplate adjustment of the tax paid. In that view of the matter, in our opinion, the learned Judge was fully justified in rejecting the writ petition filed by the appellant. We do not see any ground to interfere with the orders so passed by the learned single Judge. Therefore, the appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected.
Ordered accordingly.
(H.L.DATTU) Chief Justice
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge
ahz/DK.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether adjustment of entry tax paid against refundable demand is permissible.
Whether the Single Judge was correct in dismissing the writ petition regarding tax adjustment.
Whether the writ appeal requires intervention of this Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.(C) No.6069 of 2006Distinguished¶25
K. Sodaran
The State of Kerala
H.L. Dattu
K.T. Sankaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
H.L. Dattu and K.T. Sankaran
Parties & counsel
