Disposed

M/S,.Power Link Services v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Kerala HC20 May 2011WP(C)/13697/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging demand notices under the Revenue Recovery Act issued despite pending appeal proceedings, the Kerala High Court directed the second respondent to consider and pass orders on applications for condonation of delay and stay, and to keep coercive proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Coercive proceedings to be kept in abeyance; second respondent to consider condonation of delay stay applications within one month.

M/S,.Power Link Services Vs the Commercial Tax Officer — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2011 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 13697 of 2011(J)

PETITIONER(S):

M/S.POWER LINK SERVICES,WARRIAM BUILDING IRIMPANAM-682309,REP;BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, HARI.M.R,AGED 36 YEARS,S/O.RUDRAN,MAKALIYETH WARRIAM,IRIMPANAM.P.O,THRIPUNITHURA,KANAYANNOOR TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

¶13

THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER,OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-15.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-15.

¶15

INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-30.

¶16

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.PRADEEP

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J

¶19

W.P.(C).13697/2011

¶20

Dated this the 20^th day of May, 2011

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Being aggrieved of Ext.P2 assessment order passed under Section 25 of the KVAT Act, petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal as borne by Ext.P3, along with Ext.P4 petition for stay and Ext.P5 application to condone the delay, which are pending consideration before the second respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the pendency of the proceedings as above, Exts.P8 and P9 demand notices have been issued under the Revenue Recovery Act, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

¶23

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances, the second respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 application to condone the delay in filing the appeal as well as Ext.P4 petition for stay, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶25

W.P.(C).13697/11

¶26

¶27

Coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P8 and P9 shall be kept in abeyance till such time.

¶28

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with the copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for taking further steps.

¶29

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶30

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge

¶31

mrcs

M/S,.Power Link Services v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S,.Power Link Services 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smitha Karthikapally Vs the District Collector,Ernakulam

Global Industries Vs Commissioner of Customs,Kochi & Another

Azhar Educational Trust Vs the R.D.O.

K.S.Mohammed Sameer Vs Commercial Tax Officer

A.T.M.Vaidyraj Oushadhasala Vs the Asst.Commissioner(Appeals)& Another

M/S.Metro Infrasys Pvt.Ltd Vs the Commercial Tax Officer