A dealer sued for non-consideration of refund applications for excess input tax. The authority undertook to consider the representations within three weeks. The court dismissed the petition based on this assurance.
Petition dismissed; authorities directed to consider representations within three weeks.
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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 17030 of 2018
------------------------
PETITIONER
M/S.AJAY IRON & STEEL PVT. LTD, VI/1457, LAXMANA NAGAR - 29, ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM - 02 REPRESENTED BY P.UDAYAKUMAR, DIRECTOR.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.SOMAN SMT.T.RADHAMANY
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SGST DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM - 02.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SGST DEPARTMENT, ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM - 02.
3. THE COMMISSIONER, SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, KARAMANA P.O.,
4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.V.
WP(C).No. 17030 of 2018 (C)
APPENDIX
| PETITIONER(S)' --------------- |
EXHIBITS -------- |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P1: |
TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 21CC APPLICATION DATED 29-05-2013 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CLAIMING REFUND OF INPUT TAX REMAINING UNADJUSTED AS ON 31-03-2013. |
| EXHIBIT P1(A): |
TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 21CC APPLICATION DATED 05-05-2014 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CLAIMING REFUND OF INPUT TAX REMAINING UNADJUSTED AS ON 31-03-2014. |
| EXHIBIT P1(B): |
TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 21CC APPLICATION DATED 05-05-2015 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CLAIMING REFUND OF INPUT TAX REMAINING UNADJUSTED AS ON 31-03-2015. |
| EXHIBIT P1(C): |
TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 21CC APPLICATION DATED 05-05-2016 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CLAIMING REFUND OF INPUT TAX REMAINING UNADJUSTED AS ON 31-03-2016. |
| EXHIBIT P2: |
TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 11-10-2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO CONSIDER EXHIBIT P1 REFUND APPLICATION. |
| EXHIBIT P2(A): |
TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 11-10-2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO CONSIDER EXHIBIT P1(A) REFUND APPLICATION. |
| EXHIBIT P2(B): |
TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 12-10-2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO CONSIDER EXHIBIT P1 (B) REFUND APPLICATION. |
| EXHIBIT P2(C): |
TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 11-10-2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO CONSIDER EXHIBIT P1 (C)REFUND APPLICATION. |
| EXHIBIT P3: |
TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 11-12-2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO GIVE APPROPRIATE DIRECTIONS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REFUND APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. |
| EXHIBIT P4: |
TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 21-03-2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT REQUESTING TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER EXHIBITS - P1 TO P1(C)APPLICATION. |
WP(C).No. 17030 of 2018 (C)
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE EXHIBIT P4 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 21-03-2018.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL ---------------------
/TRUE COPY/ K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE 21.07.2018
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
================================
W.P.(C). No.17030 of 2018
===================================
Dated this the 16th day of July, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a dealer in Kerala Value Added Tax Act
and Central Sales Tax Act, complained that for the assessment years 2012-2013 to 2015-2016, the petitioner
paid excess tax. Seeking refund, he filed Exts.P2 to P2(c) representations. Aggrieved that the authorities have not acted on his representations, the petitioner has filed
this Writ Petition.
representations, within three weeks.
Recording that submission, I dispose of this Writ Petition.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
JUDGE
sd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether writ jurisdiction should be exercised to direct authorities to consider the petitioner's representations for refund of excess input tax paid.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Ajay Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd
The Assistant Commissioner, SGST Department, Special Circle
The Deputy Commissioner, SGST Department
The Commissioner, SGST Department, Tax Tower
The State of Kerala
Dama Seshadri Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
