Partly allowed

M/S.New Line Constructions v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Aug 2014RP/576/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a review petition filed after a tax judgment directed partial payment under the W.P.(C) procedure, the High Court of Kerala allowed the review to the extent of reducing the remittance amount to Rs. 9,00,000/-. The court reasoned that since the tax demand was rectified and reduced, the petitioner only needs to remit 30% of the new figure. The order was made in a Tamil month representation in par

What did the court decide?

Remittance of Rs. 9,00,000/- within one month to replace the earlier directive of Rs. 10,00,000/-.

M/S.New Line Constructions Vs State of Kerala — GST and Indirect Tax | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/17TH SRAVANA, 1936

¶5

RP.No. 576 of 2014 (J)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 17700/2014 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 11-07-2014

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER :

¶8

M/S.NEW LINE CONSTRUCTIONS PANORAMA RESIDENCY, KUMARANASAN ROAD KALOOR, ERNAKULAM-682019 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR ALOK ALEXANDER.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.K.LATHA

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :

¶11

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (WORKS CONTRACT & LT), COMMERCIAL TAXES ERNAKULAM-682018.

¶13

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) II, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)

¶14

COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682018

¶15

4. INSPECTING ASSISTNAT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682030

¶16

R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

¶17

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

...2/-

¶20

RP.No. 576 of 2014 (J)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶23

ANNEXURE A : COPY OF THE RECTIFIED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10-6-2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶24

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE Mn

K.Vinod Chandran, J.

R.P.No.576/2014 in W.P.(C).No.17700 of 2014-J

¶29

-----------------------------------------------------------------

¶30

Dated this the 08^th day of August, 2014

¶31

ORDER

¶32

The petitioner seeks review of the judgment on the ground that on a rectification application filed, there is considerable reduction in the demand and 30% of the demand now would be only Rs.9,00,000/- and the judgment directed payment of Rs.10,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further urge that there may be a reduction in so far as the percentage indicated as condition.

¶33

It is to be noticed that the petitioner had undertaken before this Court that the petitioner would pay 30% of the demand and in such circumstances this Court had directed payment of Rs.10,00,000/-. In the context of the rectification order, there would be reduction in the demand, the 30% of which would come to Rs.9,00,000/-. In such circumstance, the petitioner shall remit Rs.9,00,000/- [Rupees nine lakhs only] within a period of one month from today.

¶34

The review petition is allowed only to that extent.

¶35

Sd/K.Vinod Chandran, Judge

¶36

vku.

¶37

( true copy )

M/S.New Line Constructions v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.New Line Constructions 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.O.Jose @ Ouseph Vs P.D Jayaraj

Siddikul Akbar K.P. Vs P.Ramakrishnan

S. Nataraja Pillai Vs Antony Chacko

A.G.Ravindranathan Vs the Land Revenue Commissioner

P.K.Rajan Vs Director of Treasury

Gaia Properties and Infrastructures Vs the Commercial Tax Officer