Disposed

P.J.Chandy v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Kerala HC18 Jan 2012WP(C)/1382/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition regarding seized capital equipment used in a works contract. The appellant was directed to release goods upon furnishing a bond and obtain tax liability certification from the 1st respondent.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release goods on furnishing a simple bond; Direction to determine tax liability and ensure deduction from bills.

P.J.Chandy Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation — GST and Indirect Tax | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2012/28TH POUSHA 1933

¶5

WPC.No. 1382 of 2012 (W)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. P.J.CHANDY S/O.JOSEPH, PUTHENPARAMBIL, CHANNANIKKADU P.O. KOTTAYAM (VECHILE SUPERVISOR KERALA STSATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTAYAM DEPOT-RETIRED ON 31/5/2002).

¶8

2. N.RAJAN MATHEW NEDIYAKALAYIL, VELLOOTHURUTHY, KUZHIMATTOM P.O. KOTTAYAM. (VEHCLE SUEPRVISOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTAYAM DEPOT-RETIRED ON 30/11/2007.)

¶9

3. N.D.CHACKO NJARATHADATHIL HOUSE, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O. KOTTAYAM) (VEHICLE SUPERVISOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTAYAM DEPOT, RETIRED ON 31/5/2007).

¶10

4. K.K.SOMAN, EANCHAKATTUPARAMBIL, PUTHUPPALLY P.O. KOTTAYAM (MECHANIC KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTAYAM DEPOT-RETIRED ON 31/8/2007).

¶11

5. K.V.NINAN PARIMATTATHIL HOUSE, PAMPADY P.O. KOTTAYAM (INSPECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTAYAM DEPOT-RETIRED ON 31/1/2003). 6. P.C.MATHAN, PUTHUKULATHU HOUSE, PAMPADY P.O., KOTTAYAM (INSPECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTAYAM DEPOT-RETIRED ON 31/1/2003). BY ADV. SRI.ANANDARAJAN.N

¶12

...2/-

¶13

WPC.No. 1382 of 2012 (W) -2-

¶14

RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPLURAM-23.
2. THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR & CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.
3. THE PERSONNEL OFFICER (PENSION) KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN FORT P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.
4. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KOTTAYAM-686 004.
R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC, KSRTC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2012, ALONG WITH WP(C) NO.1378/2012 & CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

...3/-

¶18

WPC.No. 1382 of 2012 (W)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1(a): TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P1(b): TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P1(c): TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P1(d): TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE 4TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P1(e): TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE 5TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P1(f): TRUE COPY OF PENSION PAYMENT ORDER OF THE 6TH PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 25/2/2010 IN WA.NO.210 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 30/11/2010 IN WPC.35793/10 OF THE HON'BLECOURT OF KERALA.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ.

¶27

WA.NO. 1382 of 2012

¶28

Dated this the 26th day of July, 2012

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

Ramachandran Nair, J.

¶31

The question raised is whether the goods imported attract advance tax payable under the Kerala Value Added Tax

¶32

Act. We have heard counsel for the appellant and also Government Pleader for respondents.

¶33

After hearing both sides we notice that the appellant has undertaken a work for construction of Hydro Electric Project for KSEB. The project involves import of items of capital equipment which are now detained at the check post demanding advance tax. What we feel is that the transaction is a works contract and since tax has to be deducted at source by the awarder, it is for the department to determine the liability atleast with regard to deduction to be made by the KSEB for remittance to the Sales tax department. We accordingly dispose of the writ appeal by directing the 2^nd respondent to release the goods on

¶34

WA 1382 /2012

¶35

¶36

the petitioner furnishing a simple bond without surety for the advance tax amount demanded and along with it a copy of certificate of registration issued to them under the KVAT Act.

¶37

There will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to determine the tax liability for the work as a whole and intimate the KSEB with regard to the taxes and stages of deduction to be made for compliance by KSEB. The 1^st respondent will ensure that taxes are recovered by KSEB from the bills and remitted before him. The 1^st respondent will also examine whether sufficient security is furnished by the appellant and if not he can demand security. There will be a direction to the KSEB not to release any more

¶38

payment to the appellant under the contract until the 1^st respondent passes orders as above. The appellant will not raise any bill against the KSEB until order is passed by the 1^st respondent and along with the next bill appellant will produce the order issued by the 1^st respondent. After release of the goods the file will be transferred to the 1^st respondent for adjudication. There will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to pass orders within two weeks from today and KSEB or Appellant

¶39

WA 1382 /2012

¶40

¶41

will remit taxes as demanded by first respondent.

¶42

Issue photo copy of the judgment today itself to the Government Pleader also.

¶43

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE

¶44

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE

¶45

pmn/

¶46

WA 1382 /2012 4

P.J.Chandy v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.J.Chandy v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

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

M/S.Nagarjuna Herbal Concentrates Vs K.S.E.B.

Manu.N. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Francis Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

G.Vijay Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

M.M.Paulose Vs the Punja Special Officer

W.Cyril Babu Vs the Dy. Inspector Genral of Police