Revenue filed revision challenging the Kerala VAT Appellate Tribunal's decision to reduce penalty under the Kerala VAT Act. High Court found no error in Tribunal's application of precedent and dismissed the revision, also denying condonation of delay.
Revision petition and C.M. Application dismissed without condonation of delay.
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 THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/9TH MAGHA, 1937
OT.Rev.No. 20 of 2016 ()
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN TAVAT 352/2013 of KERALA VAT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM DATED 30-04-2015
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/REVENUE:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW) COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV.BOBBY JOHN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
RESPONDENT(S)/APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:
SRI.SHEFEER.U.H, NAFEESA WOOD PRODUCTS, ARAKKAPADY, PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683 542.
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O.T.REV.20/16
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE A : COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SQUAD NO.5, MATTANCHERRY DATED 23.12.2010. ANNEXURE B : COPY OF ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN KAVATA 1553/2011.
ANNEXURE C : COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN TA (VAT) NO.352/13 DATED 30.04.2015.
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE.
jg-5/2
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANU SIVARAMAN, JJ.
O.T.Revn.(VAT) No.20 of 2016 and C.M.Appl.No.33 of 2016
.................................................................... Dated this the 29th day of January, 2016.
O R D E R
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.
O.T.Rev.20/16
-2-
Annexure-A order under Section 67(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The Tribunal in the second appeal considered the questions in the light of the decision of this Court in U.K.Monu Timbers v. State of Kerala [2012 (3) KHC 111]. We see that the said precedent has been rightly applied to the facts and circumstances of the case and the Tribunal was justified in interfering with the quantum of penalty. We see no illegality or impropriety in the Tribunal having reduced the penalty to be at `10,000/- for non-production of books of accounts at the time of inspection. We do not see any ground to entertain this revision.
In the result, the C.M.Application and the O.T.Revision are dismissed.
(THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE)
(ANU SIVARAMAN, JUDGE)
jg-29/1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal erred in interference with the quantum of penalty imposed under Section 67(1) of the Kerala VAT Act.
Whether condonation of delay in filing the revision petition is sustainable given the Tribunal's decision on legal questions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
U.K.Monu Timbers v. State of KeralaRelied on¶31
U.K.Monu Timbers v. State of Kerala [2012 (3) KHC 111]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Kerala
Sri.Shefeer.U.H
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
