Disposed

S.Bhuvaneswari & Another v. Commercial Tax Officer & Another

Kerala HC1 Apr 2013WP(C)/2678/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought refund of entry tax levied on a bus body and chassis pending a Supreme Court appeal challenging the Court's earlier judgment declaring such levy unconstitutional. The Court dismissed the petition as premature.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as premature; petitioner left to claim refund after the outcome of the pending appeal before the Apex Court.

S.Bhuvaneswari & Another Vs Commercial… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2013/11TH CHAITHRA 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 2678 of 2009 (R)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1. S.BHUVANESWARI, W/O. A.SELVAM, T.E.ROAD, VADAKKANCHERRY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶8

2. SUMATHI,

¶9

W/O. V.A. KRISHNASWAMI, LAKSHMI NIVAS ANCHUMOORTHI POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1. SALES TAX INSPECTOR SALES TAX CHECK POST, GOPALAPURAM.

¶13

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.T.K.SHAIJ RAJ

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-042013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C) NO.2678/2009

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

EXT.P1: COPY OF RECEIPT NO.464560 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶19

EXT.P2: COPY OF RECEIPT NO.465252 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶20

//TRUE COPY//

¶21

PA TO JUDGE

¶22

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶23

W.P.(C) No.2678 OF 2009

¶24

Dated this the 1^st day of April, 2013

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

~~~~~~~~~~~

¶27

Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent. Service is complete.

¶28

Petitioners say that they brought a bus body and chasis from outside the State and were levied entry tax. The payment which was acknowledged by Exts.P1 and P2. Subsequently, this Court declared levy of entry tax is unconstitutional as per the judgment in Thresiamma Chirayil v. State of Kerala [2007(1) KLT 303]. It is thereupon, this writ petition was filed seeking refund of the tax levied. Although this Court has rendered the judgment as above, the learned Government Pleader points out about the pendency of the appeal filed by the State before the Apex Court. Therefore, at this stage, the request of the petitioner to refund is premature.

¶29

Accordingly, I dispose of the writ petition leaving it open to the petitioner to claim refund depending upon the outcome of the appeal that is now pending before the Apex Court against the judgment of this Court referred to above.

¶30

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)

¶31

ps/1/4

S.Bhuvaneswari & Another v. Commercial Tax Officer & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Bhuvaneswari & Another v. Commercial Tax Officer & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijaya Mohanan Vs Authorised Officer

V.v.Venugopal, Secretary, Perinthalmanna Taluk Rural Housing Society Ltd. NO.270 Vs Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Malappuram

Sudha Girish Vs the Manager, Federal Bank

A.P.Avaracha Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

K.M.Rajan Vs Chief Manager, Federal Bank

D.Rajkumar Vs Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.