Dismissed

M/S Aswathy Hardwares & Paints v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Kerala HC8 Aug 2011WA/1163/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appearing as an emergency appeal after the Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the Tribunal to decide a stay application. The High Court deemed the appeal not maintainable and the tax demand insignificant compared to the petitioner's turnover, dismissing the appeal without interference.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal dismissed on grounds of non-maintainability and perversity not established due to insignificant demand.

M/S Aswathy Hardwares & Paints Vs the Commercial Tax… — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN

¶5

MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933

¶6

WA.No. 1163 of 2011()

¶7

--------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.21238/2011 Dated 04/08/2011

¶8

APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER

¶9

¶10

M/S.ASWATHY HARDWARES & PAINTS, AYILYAM COMPLEX, MELAMURI,PALAKKAD,REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,MOHANDAS.G,

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR

¶12

SMT.K.HYMAVATHY

¶13

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶14

¶15

THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,IST CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,PALAKKAD 678 001.

¶16

THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD 678 004.

¶17

INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 678 001.

¶18

MR.MOHAMMED RAFIQ, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶19

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.A.NO.1163/2011

APPENDIX

APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS

ANNEXURE-A : COPY OF LETTER OF M/S.ASIAN PAINTS DATED 28/01/2011. //TRUE COPY//

¶24

PA TO JUDGE.

¶25

¶26

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.

¶27

.................................................................... W.A.No.1163 of 2011

¶28

Dated this the 8th day of August, 2011.

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶31

The appellant/petitioner is in this Court in the second round. In the first round, when the learned Single Judge declined to grant direction to the Tribunal to pass orders on the stay application, the appellant/petitioner withdrew the WP (C) and moved the Tribunal, and still the Tribunal has not passed order, is the case of the petitioner. In the second round of writ petition this court issued direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the stay application within six weeks from the date of the judgment i.e. 04/08/2011. Obviously, the Tribunal has time to comply with the order, and within another three days the appellant/petitioner has filed this Writ Appeal against the said judgment.

¶32

In the first place, this Writ Appeal is not maintainable because the WP(C) was allowed against which the petitioner

¶33

W.A.No.1163/2011

¶34

¶35

cannot have grievance. Further, we notice that considering the huge turnover admitted by the petitioner, which is Rs.20 crores, the balance demand of tax of around Rs.70,000/- is insignificant. We, therefore decline to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, which in our view is not against the appellant.

¶36

Consequently, this Writ Appeal is dismissed.

¶37

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

¶38

(P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE)

¶39

M/S Aswathy Hardwares & Paints v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aswathy Hardwares & Paints v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Othe Vs Babu Thomas

M/S.Tmt Granites (P) Ltd. Vs the Agricultural Income Tax

Adv.Suresh Babu.P.K. Vs Circle Inspector of Excise and Others

The Chief General Manager Vs K.Vijayakumar

Union of India Vs K.v.Rajasekharan Nair

Sameer T.P Vs the State of Kerala and Others