The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition challenging recovery steps for a disputed amount. Rejecting the petitioner's claims, the court found no merit or bona fides and dismissed the petition.
Writ petition dismissed; no further recovery steps temporarily stayed status quo ante.
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 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/24TH PHALGUNA 1933
WP(C).No. 1231 of 2007 (V)
PETITIONER(S):
GEEKAY HYGIENICS (P) LTD., PUNNAYAM, ASAMANNOOR, PERUMBAVOOR REPRESENTED BY IT'S MG. DIRECTOR MAHESH KUMAR B.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.J.XAVIER SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
2. THE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER,
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.SUDHEESH KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C)NO.1231/2007
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO.JUDGE
sts
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
W.P.(C). 1231 of 2007
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2012
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is before this Court challenging the recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P4 issued under the R.R. Act seeking to realize Rs. 1,31,250/-(Rupees one lakhs thirty one thousand two hundred and fifty) plus interest and cost in respect of the assessment year 2003-04.
Court on 11.01.2007, the following interim order was passed:
W.P.C. No. 1231 of 2007
-2-
“Govt. Pleader to get instruction as to whether Ext.P3 has been considered and any penalty order was passed in this case. If so, whether penalty order is served. The file relating to the matter was also be produced. Time granted two weeks. In the meanwhile, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 shall be kept in abeyance.”
and allegations raised by the petitioner do not keep the right track of truth. It is stated that final order under Section 45(A) was passed by the concerned authority on 31.3.2006 and a copy of the said order was forwarded to the petitioner by registered post, which was served upon the petitioner on 12.9.2006, as borne by the postal acknowledgment card returned from the petitioner. It is without disclosing the actual facts and figures, that this writ petition has been filed and the petitioner has been enjoying the benefit of the interim order dated 11.01.2007 all throughout.
This Court finds that there is no merit or bonafides in the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Kp/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging recovery steps under the R.R. Act has merit or bona fides.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Geekay Hygienics (P) Ltd.
The Intelligence Officer, Commercial Taxes, Mattancherry, at Alwaye
The Inspecting Asst. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Moovattupuzha
P.R. Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
