Writ petition challenging penalty order for non-issuance of documents before the Appellate Authority under KVAT Act was dismissed as alternate remedy existed. Recovery proceeds kept in abeyance for three weeks.
Petition dismissed without prejudice to right of appeal; recovery steps in abeyance for 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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019/18TH ASWINA, 1941
W.P(C).No.10623 OF 2019(C)
PETITIONER:
NIKUNJAM CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD. INDRAPRASTHAM, PATTOM-KAWDIAR ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR S.KRISHNA KUMAR.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL
RESPONDENTS:
1 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, WORKS CONTRACT, 2ND FLOOR, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.
BY SRI.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.10623/2019 : 2 :
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P15 penalty order passed against him under the KVAT Act. The essential contention raised by the petitioner is that, before passing Ext.P15 order, the petitioner had not been given the documents sought for so as to prefer an effective reply to the penalty proposal, and therefore, the said order is vitiated by a non-compliance with the rules of natural justice.
W.P.(C).No.10623/2019 : 3 :
on account of any non-compliance with the rules of natural justice, I am of the view that the challenge in the writ petition against Ext.P15 order cannot be legally sustained. This is more so because the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy against Ext.P15 order before the Appellate Authority under the KVAT Act. Resultantly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the Appellate Authority, the writ petition, in its challenge against Ext.P15 order, is dismissed.
Taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that that the petitioner would require some time to move the Appellate Authority, I direct that recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed against the petitioner by Ext.P15 order shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks so as to enable the petitioner to move the Appellate Authority, in the meanwhile. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment before the Appellate Authority, for further action.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
prp/10/10/19
W.P.(C).No.10623/2019 : 4 :
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | COPY OF THE SHOP INSPECTION REPORT DATED 30.8.2014. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 30.8.2014 FOR THE RECOVERY OF THE RECORDS. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | COPY OF NOTICE DATED 7.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | COPY OF NOTICE DATED 22.2.2019 ISSUED |
| BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER S.67 OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. |
|
| EXHIBIT P4 (A) | COPY OF NOTICES DATED 22.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER S.67 OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. |
| EXHIBIT P4 (B) | COPY OF NOTICE DATED 22.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER S.67 OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | COPY OF LETTER DATED 2.3.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P6 | COPY OF REPLY DATED 11.3.2019 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P7 | COPY OF LETTER DATED 11.3.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P8 | COPY OF NOTICE DATED 2.3.2019 ISSUED |
| BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION | |
| 25(1) OF THE ACT. |
W.P.(C).No.10623/2019 : 5 :
| EXHIBIT P9 | COPY OF NOTICE DATED 11.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P10 | COPY OF LETTER DATED 19.3.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P11 | COPY OF REPLY DATED 25.3.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P12 | COPY OF LETTER DATED 26.3.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P13 | COPY OF LETTER DATED 27.3.2019 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P14 | COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 1.4.2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C).NO.7884 OF 2019. |
| EXHIBIT P15 | COPY OF ORDER DATED 30.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P16 | A COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30-08-2014 ISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII, NEYYATTINKARA. |
| EXHIBIT P17 | A COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30-08-2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN SUPPORT OF THE DOCUMENTS. |
| EXHIBIT P18 | A COY OF THE PAGE 7 OF RECOVERY 9 FROM THE RECOVERED CD. |
| EXHIBIT P19 | A COPY OF TEH GROUP SUMMARY OF SALES ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. |
| EXHIBIT P20 | A COPY OF THE RETURN FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2012-13. |
W.P.(C).No.10623/2019 : 6 :
EXHIBIT P21 A COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF EACH PROJECT AND THE TURNOVER CONCEDED IN THE ANNUAL RETURN.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the penalty order under KVAT Act was vitiated by non-compliance with rules of natural justice due to non-issuance of documents?
Whether the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy before the Appellate Authority challenging the penalty order?
Whether recovery steps against the petitioner should remain in abeyance pending appeal?
4 provisions across 1 enactments
NIKUNJAM CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD.
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
THE STATE TAX OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
