Allowed

C.P.Mariyamma v. the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) Iii.

Kerala HC15 Mar 2019WA/806/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal allowed by the Kerala High Court set aside a single judge order dismissing a writ petition against assessment. The court noted the lower court did not address the limitation bar under Section 25(1) of KVAT Act and directed remitting the petition for fresh consideration on that issue.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment in W.P(C) No. 21355/2018 is set aside. The writ petition is restored on the files and posted before the learned Single Judge for fresh consideration o

C.P.Mariyamma Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)… — GST and Indirect Tax | 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

FRIDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶7

WA.No. 806 of 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21355/2018 of HIGHCOURT DATED 11.01.2019

¶9

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶10

C.P.MARIYAMMA AGED 63 YEARS PROPRIETORIX, M/S AMBILI TRADERS, RICE MERCHANT, RICE BAZAR, THRISSUR.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM SMT.S.K.DEVI

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT) III. STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR 680 004

¶14

2 THE COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶15

3 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶16

4 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO 46, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110 001.

¶17

SPL.GP SRI.C.E UNNIKRISHNAN

¶18

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WA.No. 806 of 2019

¶20

¶21

C.K.ABDUL REHIM &

¶22

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.

¶23

¶24

W.A No. 806 of 2019

¶25

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2019

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

Abdul Rehim,J

¶28

The petitioner in W.P(C) No.21355/2018 is challenging the judgment dated 11.01.2019. The respondents are the respondents in the writ petition.

¶29

Ext.P1 order of assessment was challenged in the writ petition, inter alia based on a contention that the assessment is barred under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act. There was also a challenge against the 101^th amendment of the Constitution and the provision of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

¶30

The above writ petition was dismissed by the learned

¶31

Single Judge along with a batch of other cases by following the judgment in W.P(C) No. 11335/2018 and connected cases. But the judgment in W.P(C) No.11335/2018 had only dealt with the question

¶32

WA.No. 806 of 2019

¶33

¶34

of validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the question of limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act was not considered therein. The learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) had fairly conceded the above said aspect. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the writ petition need to be remitted for a fresh consideration on the question of bar of limitation provided under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act.

¶35

Hence, the writ appeal is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment in W.P(C) No. 21355/2018 is hereby set aside. The writ petition is restored on the files. The Registry is directed to post the writ petition before the learned Single Judge dealing with the subject, as per the roster. It is made clear that the judgment in W.P(C) No. 11335/2018 and connected cases, will be binding on the question of validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act.

¶36

It is made clear that, interim order if any prevailed before the dismissal of the writ petition will continue to survive in force.

¶37

Sd/-C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE

¶38

Sd/-R.NARAYANA PISHARADI,

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

lsn

C.P.Mariyamma v. the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) Iii.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.P.Mariyamma v. the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) Iii.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Bharath Glass House Vs the Assistant Commissioner

T.Oommen Panicker Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Bejoy Cyriac Vs the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

State of Kerala Vs Zeenath Beevi

Kuruvila Mathew, Vs the Commercial Tax OFFICER-1

Kripa Trading Company Vs the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes