Allowed

Dlf Projects Ltd. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Mar 2019WA/751/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Division Bench allowed the writ appeal against a judgment dismissing a writ petition concerning the limitation bar and validity of Section 25B of the KVAT Act. The court set aside the impugned judgment and remitted the petition to the Single Bench for fresh consideration of the challenge regarding the Section 25B validity, which had been omitted. The interim order in the writ petition was rev

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment passed by the Single Bench dated 18-01-2019 is set aside. The writ petition is remitted to the Single Bench for fresh consideration regarding the challenge to Section 25B of the

Dlf Projects Ltd. Vs State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶6

THURSDAY ,THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶7

WA.No. 751 of 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 18-01-2019 IN WP(C) 18669/2018 of HIGHCOURT

¶9

APPELLANT:

¶10

DLF PROJECTS LTD. BUILDING NO. 29/288, STERLING APARTMENTS , JANATHA ROAD, VYTTILA, COCHIN REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER MR. SUBRAMANIAN.S.,

¶11

BY ADV. SMT. K.LATHA

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (WC AND LT), O/O THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPT, CLASS TOWER 2ND FLOOR, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNKULAM 682 018.

¶15

3 THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES, TAX TOWER, KILLIPALAM, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 002.

¶16

4 CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 110 001.

¶17

5 THE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM 682 030.

¶18

R4 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH B., SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS

¶19

OTHER PRESENT:

¶20

SPL.GP TAXES. SRI. C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN

¶21

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

W.A. No.751/2019

¶23

-2

¶24

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. &

¶25

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J.

¶26

W.A. No. 751 OF 2019

¶27

DATED THIS THE 7^th DAY OF MARCH, 2019

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

Abdul Rehim, J:

¶30

The appellant challenged Ext.P1 order of assessment inter alia contending that it is barred by limitation. Contention was that Section 25 B of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'KVAT Act' for short) is unconstitutional. They also challenged the vires of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. But the writ petition was dismissed through a common judgment in W.P. (C) No.11335/2018 and connected cases.

¶31

Learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that, the judgment in W.P (C) No.11335/2018 deals only with the issue of validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and that the issue regarding the validity of Section 25B of the KVAT Act, which now stands covered by a Division Bench decision of this court in W.P (C) No.13246/2014 and connected cases, was omitted consideration. Learned Government Pleader on the other hand, submitted that,

¶32

W.A. No.751/2019 -3

¶33

judgment in W.P (C) No.13246/2014 and connected cases has already been taken up before the hon'ble Supreme Court at the instances of the State Government and SLPs filed in this regard stands admitted.

¶34

However, we take note of the fact that the writ petition was dismissed without considering one of the major challenges raised against validity of Section 25 B of the KVAT Act. Hence we are of the opinion that matter need to be remitted back to the Single Bench.

¶35

Under the above mentioned circumstances, we allow the writ appeal. The impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P (C) No.18669/2018, dated 18-01-2019 is hereby set aside. The writ petition is remitted back to the Single Bench for fresh consideration and disposal. It is made clear that the remand will be limited only with respect to consideration of the challenge against validity of Section 25 B of the KVAT Act.

¶36

Needless to observe that interim order if any force in the writ petition will stand revived.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE

¶39

Sd/R. NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE

AMG

W.A. No.751/2019

-4

APPENDIX

APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES:

¶45

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO. 12672 OF 2017 DATED 14TH AUGUST 2018.

¶46

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶47

NIL

¶48

AMG

Dlf Projects Ltd. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dlf Projects Ltd. 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

Sangeetha Jewellery Vs the State Tax Officer, S.G.S.T. Department

M/S. C P Bawa Timbers and Vs State Tax Officer

Sunil Kumar K Vs Prasobhadevi

Suseela Vs Chandran

V.K.Kassim Vs Intelligence Officer (Ib)

Listin Stephen Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam