Disposed

Shammas Jamsheer M.C. v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Kerala HC22 Jan 2016WP(C)/638/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition against penalty orders under the Kerala VAT Act, the High Court disposed of the matter by directing the Second Respondent to consider stay petitions within one month. Recovery steps initiated via demand notices were kept in abeyance pending the outcome of the stay petitions.

What did the court decide?

Second Respondent to consider stay petitions within one month; recovery steps to remain in abeyance.

Shammas Jamsheer M.C. Vs the Commercial Tax Officer — 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

FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2016/2ND MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 638 of 2016 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SHAMMAS JAMSHEER M.C., AGED 32 YEARS, S/O ABDULLA, PROPRIETOR, M/S WHITECOOL, KUMARASAMI ROAD, NARIKKUNI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUDHISH

¶9

SRI.N.ABDUL AZEEZ SMT.M.MANJU

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 4TH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶12

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶13

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KUNNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673571.

¶14

4. THE DEPUTY THAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶15

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C).No. 638 of 2016 (D)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶21

P1 COPY OF THE ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26-04-2014 FOR THE OFFENCE OF NON FILING OF MONTHLY RETURN FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY,2014 WITHIN TIME

¶22

P2 COPY OF THE ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26.04.2014 FOR THE OFFENCE OF NON FILING OF MONTHLY RETURN FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY,2014 WITHIN TIME

¶23

P3 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION R.P.NO.167 OF 2015 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTAED 5.10.2015

¶24

P4 COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION R.P.NO.168 OF 2015 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5.10.2015.

¶25

P5 COPY OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FILED IN REVISION PETITION RP.NO.167/15 BEFORE THE R2 DATED 8/1/16

¶26

P6 COPY OF THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FILED IN REVISION PETITION RP.NO.168/15 BEFORE THE R2 DATED 8/1/16

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶33

W.P.(C). No. 638 of 2016

¶34

===================================================== Dated this the 22^nd day of January, 2016

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

Against the penalty orders order passed under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as the KVAT Act, the petitioner preferred Exts.P3 and P4 revision petitions and Exts.P5 and P6 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 Exs.P1 and P2 demand notices for recovery of the amounts confirmed against the petitioner.

¶37

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

¶38

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.P5 and P6 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.P1 and P2 notices,

¶39

-2-

¶40

W.P.(C). No. 638 of 2016

¶41

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

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶44

das /22.01.2016

Shammas Jamsheer M.C. v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shammas Jamsheer M.C. v. the Commercial Tax Officer

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

Unnikrishnan Nair v. Vs Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

M/S. Rainbow Traders Vs the Commercial Tax Officer, Kunnamkulam

Dasan T.D Vs the Authorised Officer

M/S.Kalyan Jewellers India Pvt.Ltd. Vs the Intelligence Inspector

M.P.Poulose Vs State of Kerala

Premalatha R Vs the Commiercial Tax Officer (Wc)