Disposed
Thyagaraja Chettiar v. Asst. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes
Kerala HCWP(C)/19630/2012
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
null
What the court decided
AI extract
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 ANTONY DOMINIC
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/14TH BHADRA 1934
WP(C).No. 19630 of 2012 (C)
PETITIONER(S):
THYAGARAJA CHETTIAR, MANAGING PARTNER, S/O.VENKITESH CHETTIAR "RAJEEV" S.M. STREET, CALICUT-673001.
BY ADVS.SRI.PULIKKOOL ABUBACKER SMT.P.A.ANEESHA
RESPONDENT(S):
1. ASST. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES
2. INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (I.B)
BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 19630 of 2012 (C)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
dlk
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
W.P.(C)No.19630 of 2012
Dated this the 5th day of September, 2012
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P3 to P7 assessment orders under the KVAT Act, contending that the rate of tax on Margarine and Bakery shortening is only 4% and not 12.5%. This contention is sought to be substantiated by relying on Exts.P1 and P2 judgments, which make reference to the Apex Court judgment in Aluva Sugar Agency v. State of Kerala (2011(45) VST 1) . On this basis, this writ petition has been filed without availing of the statutory remedies available to the petitioner. However, relying on the judgment in SSD Oil Mills Company Ltd. v. State of Kerala(2011 (37) VST 594) , the learned Government Pleader contends that the rate of tax applicable is 12.5% and that therefore, the levy contained in the impugned orders do not call for any interference.
W.P.(C).No.19630/2012
: 2 :
proper remedy which ought to have been instituted by the petitioner was to have taken recourse to the statutory remedies available to him.
Therefore, with that liberty, the writ petition is disposed
of.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
ln
THYAGARAJA CHETTIAR
ASST. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court