Partly allowed

Anitha P.P. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Mar 2016WP(C)/1228/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a stay on recovery proceedings for defaulted tax dues owed by the petitioner's partnership firm. The court granted time to pay the liability in monthly installments, keeping further recovery proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings stayed conditionally upon payment of Rs.20,06,617/- plus interest in 15 equal monthly installments starting 20.04.2016.

Anitha P.P. Vs State of Kerala — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/27TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 1228 of 2016 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

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

¶8

ANITHA P.P., AGED 54 YEARS, D/O. LATE M.P. BALAKRISHNAN, ROYAL CASTLE, MADHUKOTHU, VARAM P.O., KANNUR - 670 597.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIS

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

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

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, COMMISSIONERATE OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 002.

¶14

3. THE TAHSILDAR (RR), THALASSERY, TALUK OFFICE, KANNUR - 670 101.

¶15

4. K. SURESH, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.K. RAGHAVAN, MOUNIBABA'S ASHRAMAM, KRISHNA NIVAS, CHERUVATTOOR, CHEEMENI P.O., KANJANGAD - 671 313.

¶16

R1-R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.LIJU V.STEPHEN

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

msv/

¶19

WP(C).No. 1228 of 2016 (C)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

P1-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 35191358/1999-2000 DATED 01/10/2015 OF COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, II CIRCLE, KANNUR.

¶23

P2-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15/11/2015 OF 3RD RESPONDENT

¶24

P3-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. D1-140/01-02/ST DATED 16/11/2015 OF

¶25

3RD RESPONDENT

¶26

P4-TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 15/12/2015 OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE CHIEF MINISTER

¶27

P5-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. C6-42162/15/CT DATED 28/12/2015 OF 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

M sv/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶34

¶35

W.P.(C) No.1228 of 2016

¶36

- - - - Dated this the 17^th day of March 2016

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

The petitioner, who is aggrieved by the steps taken by the respondents for recovery of defaulted tax amounts, that were owing from the partnership firm of which the petitioner was a partner along with her erstwhile husband, the 4^th respondent in the writ petition, seeks only some time for discharging the liability of the partnership firm and a right to proceed against the 4^th respondent, for recovery of the said amounts paid by the petitioner on behalf of the partnership firm.

¶39

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶40

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar and taking note of the plea of financial hardship urged on behalf of the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:

¶41

i) If the petitioner pays the current liability,

¶42

W.P.(c).No.1228 of 2016

¶43

: 2 :

¶44

which is stated to be Rs.20,06,617/- together with accrued interest from today, in fifteen equal and successive monthly instalments, commencing from 20.04.2016, then further proceedings for recovery against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.

¶45

ii) It is made clear that if the petitioner commits a default in respect of any of the installments, she will lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondents will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against her from the stage at which they presently stand.

¶46

iii) It is made clear that nothing in this judgment shall stand in the way of the petitioner taking recourse to any legal remedy for recovery of amounts paid by her, from the 4^th respondent, in accordance with law.

¶47

iv) It is also made clear that, the petitioner will be entitled to avail the benefit of any Amnesty Scheme brought out by the State Government, during the pendency of stay granted in this judgment, if she qualifies for the same.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶50

sm/

Anitha P.P. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anitha P.P. 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

P.S.Manoj Kumar Vs the Repco Home Finance Ltd.

Smt.Ushakumari S. Vs the Authorized Officer

M/S. Hi-Lite Realtors (India) LLP Vs the Thahsildar

A.Q.Muslim Vs the Vijaya Bank

N.H.Sidhik Vs the Authorised Officer, Central Bank of India

Noushad U.V Vs the District Collector