Disposed

Smt.Thankamma Antony v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Sept 2012WP(C)/1740/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged revenue recovery notices under Sale Tax Act via Writ Petition. Court directed respondent to verify if liability was removed by appeal; if so, he must order refund of amounts deposited under interim stay.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to serve judgment on 2nd Respondent; if company is exonerated from liability, obtain directions to refund the interim deposited amount.

Smt.Thankamma Antony Vs State of Kerala — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/6TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 1740 of 2010 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

THANKAMMA ANTONY, W/O.K.C.ANTONY, S.R.M.ROAD, KOCHI-18.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.RAJU JOSEPH SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(IB) OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(INT) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES ERNAKULAM AT EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24.

¶12

THE TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY) KANAYANOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-11.

¶13

M/S.THANKAM CHEMICALS PVT.LIMITED, DOOR NO.34/1784, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24 ERNAKULAM.

¶14

MOLLY VARGHESE, W/O.V.D.VARGHESE, VAZHAPALLY HOUSE, POTTA PO THRISSUR.

¶15

V.D.VARGHESE, S/O.V.V.DAVIS, VAZHAPALLY HOUSE, POTTA PO, THRISSUR.

¶16

MRS.TREASA REENY, W/O.RAJAN CYRIL, NANDANTH HOUSE, THAMANAM PO, KOCHI.

¶17

MRS.LATHA RAJU, W/O.K.C.RAJU, 1-9 KENT HOMES, THAMANAM PO KOCHI-32.

¶18

MRS.MARY THOMAS,

¶19

W/O.K.J.THOMAS, KANAPPILLY HOUSE, THOTTAKKATUKARA PO ALUVA,.

¶20

W.P.(C).1740/10

¶21

-2-

¶22

MRS.ANJU SHOUKATH, W/O.SHOUKATHALI, A-2 KENT HOUSE, THAMANAM PO KOCHI-32.

¶23

BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T.EMMANUEL BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K. SHAIJ RAJ BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR BY ADV. SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C).1740/10

APPENDIX

EXHIBITS

P1TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 13.1.1999

¶29

P2TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION DATED 29.12.1998

¶30

P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.3.99 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE, ALUVA

¶31

P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.3.1999 ISSUED TO THE SPECIAL OFFICER, KSEB

¶32

P5TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 31.3.99

¶33

P6TRUE COPY OF THE PARTICULARS OF APPOINTMENTS RESPONDENTS 7 TO 10 AS DIRECTORS

¶34

P7TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.9.99 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶35

P8TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15.10.09 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶36

P9TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 4.1.10 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DEMANDING KGST ARREARS

¶37

P9(a)- TRUE COPYOF THE NOTICE DATED 4.1.10 UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DEMANDING CST ARREARS

¶38

P10TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT FOR RS.6,69,312/-

¶39

P10(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT DEMANDING RS.4,11,511/-

¶40

/true copy/ PA To Judge

¶41

ANTONY DOMINIC, J

¶42

........................................ W.P.(C).1740/2010

¶43

Dated this the 28^th day of September, 2012

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

Exts.P9 and P10, revenue recovery notices issued for

¶46

realizing the sales tax dues of a Company by name “Thankam Chemicals Pvt Ltd” for the year 1999-00, are under challenge in this writ petition.

¶47

At the admission stage, this Court passed an interim order staying recovery on condition that the petitioner remits an amount of Rs.1 Lakh. Learned counsel submits that this condition was complied with by remitting the amount.

¶48

It is now submitted that the 5^th respondent, one of the Directors of the Company had filed appeal against the assessment for the year 1999-00 and that the appeal was allowed and the Company was exonerated of the liability. It is also submitted that in such circumstances, there was no justification for continuing the revenue recovery proceedings. Therefore, petitioner submits that there is no necessity to enquire into the merits of the contentions raised.

¶49

W.P.(C).1740/2010

¶50

¶51

In such circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions.

¶52

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2^nd respondent who shall examine the correctness of the submission made as above. If as stated, there was no liability for the year 1999-00 justifying the revenue recovery action evidenced by Exts.P9 and P10, he shall issue appropriate directions for refunding the amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 19.1.2010.

¶53

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶54

mrcs

¶55

/true copy/ PA To Judge

Smt.Thankamma Antony v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Thankamma Antony v. State of Kerala

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

Nandakumar Vs Kozhikode Dist. Co-Op. Bank

Eranholikandiyil Siddique Vs the Tahsildar

Shajahan Vs the Authorised Officer

Eravi.K.R.Raman Kartha Vs Dr.K.B.Valsalakumari

M/S.New Rajastan Marbles Vs State of Kerala and Others

Bharat Sheel Ltd. Vs State of Kerala