Remanded

M/S. Aiswarya Traders v. the Assisiatnt Commissioner

Kerala HC1 Feb 2016WP(C)/2019/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the High Court quashed assessment orders passed under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act without a hearing. The Court directed the assessing officer to complete the assessment afresh following prior judicial principles.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P2 and P2(A) orders of assessment are quashed. The 1st respondent is directed to complete the assessment afresh after hearing the petitioner within one month.

M/S. Aiswarya Traders Vs the Assisiatnt Commissioner — GST and Indirect Tax | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/12TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 2019 of 2016 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S. AISWARYA TRADERS, VELLARA HOUSE, VYLATHUR P.O., NHAMANGHAT, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT. MERCY P.V.

¶8

BY SRI.K.SRIKUMAR (SENIOR ADVOCATE)

¶9

ADVS. SRI.K.J.CHERRI BABU

¶10

SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR SRI.S.A.MANSOOR (MATTANCHERRY)

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHAVAKKAD-680506.

¶13

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,

¶14

THRISSUR-680001.

¶15

3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶16

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.R.RANJITH

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

mbr/

¶19

WP(C).No. 2019 of 2016 (B)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶22

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02-11-2015 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2011-12.

¶23

EXT. P1ATRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02-11-2015 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2012-2013.

¶24

EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16-12-2015 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2011-2012.

¶25

EXT. P2ATRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 16-12-2015 ISSUED FOR THE YEAR 2012-2013.

¶26

EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02-12-2015 IN WPC NO. 23541/2012.

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶32

............................................................. W.P.(C).No.2019 Of 2016

¶33

............................................................. Dated this the 1^st day of February, 2016

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

The challenge in the writ petition is against Exts.P2 and P2(A) orders of assessment passed in relation to the petitioner for the assessment years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is essentially that, Exts.P2 and P2(A) assessment orders were passed without hearing the petitioner and without taking note of the principles laid down by this Court in Ext.P3 judgment.

¶36

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

¶37

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find from Exts.P2 and P2(A) orders that the said orders were passed without hearing the petitioner. It is also seen that the issue involved in the

¶38

-2-

¶39

W.P.(C). No.2019 of 2016

¶40

assessment orders was the subject matter of various writ petitions before this Court, and by Ext.P3 judgment, this Court has remanded the matters to the Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh in the light of the principles laid down in the said judgment. I, therefore, quash Exts.P2 and P2(A) orders of assessment and direct the 1^st respondent to complete the assessment in relation to the petitioner for the aforementioned assessment years afresh after hearing the petitioner and taking note of the principles laid down in Ext.P3 judgment. To enable the 1^st respondent to do so, I direct the petitioner to appear before the 1^st respondent at his office at 11 am on 16.02.2016. The 1^st respondent shall pass orders as directed within a month thereafter.

¶41

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶42

mns/01.02.16

M/S. Aiswarya Traders v. the Assisiatnt Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Aiswarya Traders v. the Assisiatnt Commissioner

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

Zaurabi Vs the Kasaragod District

K.T.Binu Vs the Authorised Officer

Lalil L. Vs the Authorised Officer

Sugathan Vs the District Collector

Ahmed Thasriq Malkeri Vs State Bank of India, Rep. by Its Authorised Officer

P.Radhakrishnan Nair Vs the Commercial Tax Officer, Thiruvananthapuram