Petitioner challenged adverse tax assessment and coercive steps taken before an appeal under the Central Sales Tax Act pending decision of stay. Court directed authorities to defer coercive steps until appellate authority decides stay petition.
Directed the respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the second respondent considers the stay petition.
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
THURSDAY ,THE 03RD DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 13TH POUSHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 12 of 2019
PETITIONER/S:
P.J.JOY AGED 44 YEARS PROPRIETOR, M/S.HINDUSTAN POWER LINKS, EDAYAR, MUPPATHADOM P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.S.SOMAN SMT.T.RADHAMANY
RESPONDENT/S:
OTHER PRESENT:
DR THUSHARA JAMES, GP
W.P.(C) No.12/2019
-2-
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax
Act, questioned the Ext.P1 assessment order before the second respondent. The petitioner, in the appeal, filed a stay petition, too. Ventilating his grievance that the authorities are taking coercive steps before the appellate authority could consider the stay petition
in the appeal, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
learned Government Pleader.
W.P.(C) No.12/2019
-3-
Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing the
respondent authority to defer coercive steps until the second respondent considers the stay petition. I also hope that the second respondent will dispose of the stay petition expeditiously.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
JUDGE
jjj
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CST ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 28/5/2018
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT-P1 CST ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 18/6/2018.
EXHIBIT P3
TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY OF COLLECTION OF DISPUTED TAX PURSUANT TO EXHIBITP1 ASSESSMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18/6/2018.
W.P.(C) No.12/2019
-4-
3222/18-19 RRC NO.52/18-19 DATED 12/7/2018 ISSUED ON 8/8/2018 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF THE DEMAND CREATED BY EXHIBIT-P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether coercive steps can be taken pending the decision by the appellate authority on a stay petition.
Whether the respondent authority must await the appellate authority's decision on the stay application before proceeding with coercive measures.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.J.JOY
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SPECIAL CIRCLE, COMMERCIAL TAXES MATTANCHEARRY
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
