Disposed

Abdul Gafoor v. the District Collector

Kerala HC13 Aug 2014WP(C)/12992/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a requirement to appear before the Collector regarding revenue recovery proceedings under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. The court allowed the petitioner an opportunity to appear and gave the respondent six months to finalize proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to appear before District Collector within two weeks; proceedings to be finalized within six months.

Abdul Gafoor Vs the District Collector — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/22ND SRAVANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 12992 of 2010 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

T.V. ABDUL GAFOOR, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. LATE KUNHALAN HAJI, ALSHAN, MANKAVU.P.O, CALICUT - 673 007.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.N.SANJITH SRI.JAISON JOSEPH

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOZHIKODE.

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE.

¶12

3. SALES TAX OFFICER, VTH CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE.

¶13

4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KOZHIKODE.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BOBBY JOHN

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Kss

¶17

WPC.NO.12992/2010 (Y)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.21233 OF 2009 DATED 28/07/2009. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL T.A.NO.326 OF 2008 PENDING OF THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 14/08/2009.

¶21

EXT.P3: COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 08/03/2010 ALONG WITH TENTATIVE PLEADINGS ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1.

¶22

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

¶27

=====================

¶28

W.P.(C) No. 12992 of 2010 ====================== Dated this the 13^th day of August, 2014

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner was served with a show cause notice,

¶31

calling for explanation as to why the petitioner shall not be arrested under Section 65 of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968, as evidenced by Ext.P3. The petitioner was granted an interim order, by which he was directed to pay Rs.30,000/-. The learned Government Pleader submits such amounts were paid along with collection charges and hence there is a stay of the proceedings. The revenue recovery was based on sales tax assessments made under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (KGST). The appeals and revisions from which, are said to have been rejected against the petitioner. In such circumstance, there would be no further contention with respect to the demand raised.

¶32

However, the petitioner pleads “no means” and seeks an opportunity insofar as Ext.P3 is concerned. The

¶33

W.P.(C) No. 12992 of 2010

¶34

¶35

petitioner shall appear before the 1^st respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment and the 1^st respondent shall give sufficient opportunity to the petitioner as also call for report from the concerned officers and finalise the proceedings within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the petitioner. If the petitioner does not appear before the District Collector, within time stipulated herein, necessarily, Ext.P3 can be proceeded with.

¶36

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶39

¶40

// True Copy //

¶41

P.A To Judge.

Abdul Gafoor v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Gafoor v. the District Collector

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

Geo Fox Vs Sri.C.v.Sasidharan

C.H.Abdul Khader Vs State of Kerala

V.M. Abdulkhader Vs the Kerala State Development Corporation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tibes Limited

Radha Gopan Vs South Malabar Gramina Bank

Rojer Mathew P. Vs P.T.Mathai Construction Company Pvt. Ltd.

Lekha Suresh Vs the Authorised Officer