Disposed

M/S.Steelmax Alloys Limited (Formerly Known as K.R.Alloys Ltd) v. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

Kerala HC14 Jan 2016WP(C)/1351/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this short order, the High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's stay petitions within one month. The court further directed that recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance until the stay petitions are finally decided.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on stay petitions within one month; recovery proceedings kept in abeyance.

M/S.Steelmax Alloys Limited (Formerly Known as… — 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 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/24TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 1351 of 2016 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S.STEELMAX ALLOYS LIMITED, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS K.R.ALLOYS LTD) , THILANGAD, MANJALOOR P.O., PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY K.SHABIR, DIRECTOR.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.SOMAN SMT.T.RADHAMANY

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD, PIN - 680 001.

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD AT COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, THEVARA - 682 016.

¶12

3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD - 680 001.

¶13

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.RANJITH

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

WP(C).No. 1351 of 2016 (T)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 23.11.2015.

¶20

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 25.11.2015.

¶21

EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.12.2015 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10.

¶22

EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.12.2015 AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11.

¶23

EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR EARLY HEARING OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 12.12.2015.

¶24

EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR EARLY HEARING OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAIST THE ASSESSMENT UNDER THE KVAT ACT FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 12.12.2015.

¶25

EXHIBIT-P7: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED TAX FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 12.12.2015.

¶26

EXHIBIT-P8: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED TAX FOR THE YEAR 2010-11 DATED 12.12.2015.

¶27

EXHIBIT-P9: TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 01.01.2016 FOR THE YEAR 2009-10.

¶28

EXHIBIT-P10: TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 01.01.2016 FOR THE YEAR 2010-11.

¶29

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶34

W.P.(C). No. 1351 of 2016

¶35

===================================================== Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2016

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

Against Exts.P1 and P2 assessment orders passed under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the KVAT Act, the petitioner preferred Exts.P3 and P4 appeals and Exts.P7 and P8 stay petitions before the 2^nd respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that even before the consideration of the stay petition by the 2^nd respondent, recovery steps have been initiated by issuing Exts.P9 and P10 revenue recovery notices for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner.

¶38

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶39

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts. P7 and P8 stay petitions preferred by the petitioner before him, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. Recovery steps for recovery of amounts pursuant to Exts.P9 and P10 notices,

¶40

-2-

¶41

W.P.(C). No. 1351 of 2016

¶42

shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 2^nd respondent passes orders as directed and communicates the same to the petitioner.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶45

das /14.01.2016

M/S.Steelmax Alloys Limited (Formerly Known as K.R.Alloys Ltd) v. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Steelmax Alloys Limited (Formerly Known as K.R.Alloys Ltd) v. Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)

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

Saji.D Vs Alappuzha District Co-Operative Bank Limited

Deepak T.Pottackal Vs Assistant Commissioner

M/S. Rollmen Engineering Works (P) Ltd. Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Tharun G. Kumar Vs the District Collector

Abraham Chacko Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Sri.v.M.Tomy Vs the Commercial Tax Officer