Dismissed

Hotelsaj Luciya, v. Assistant Commissioner-Iii (Assessment)

Kerala HC9 Oct 2019WP(C)/12231/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. It held that no jurisdictional defect warranted interference as an effective alternate remedy existed via appeal. Recovery steps were suspended for three weeks to permit the petitioner to file an appeal.

What did the court decide?

Recovery steps for the confirmed tax amount are kept in abeyance for three weeks to enable the petitioner to move the Appellate Authority; the writ petition is dismissed.

Hotelsaj Luciya, Vs Assistant Commissioner-Iii… — GST and Indirect Tax | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019/17TH ASWINA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.12231 OF 2019(D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

HOTEL SAJ LUCIYA, (A UNIT OF KANICHAI HOTEL (P) LTD.), EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR REJI VARGHESE.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM)

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER-III (ASSESSMENT), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, SPECIAL CIRCLE, TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 002.

¶11

R1 BY SMT.THUSHARA JAMES, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

W.P.(C).No.12231/2019

¶14

: 2 :

¶15

J U D G M E N T

¶16

The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P3 assessment order passed under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, for the assessment year 2014-15. Although various contentions are raised in the writ petition, with regard to the manner in which the tax has been assessed, including the estimation done by the Assessing Officer, while confirming the tax demand, I am of the view that the impugned assessment order does not suffer from any jurisdictional defect as would warrant an interference with the said order in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner/assessee has an effective alternate remedy by way of an appeal before the Appellate Authority, where the factual aspects regarding the correctness of the estimation done by the Assessing Officer can be gone into based on the material to be produced by the petitioner to substantiate his contention regarding the actual profit from his business. Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the Appellate Authority through an appeal against Ext.P3 assessment order, the writ petition, in its

¶17

W.P.(C).No.12231/2019

¶18

: 3 :

¶19

challenge against Ext.P3 assessment order, is dismissed.

¶20

Taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner 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.P3 assessment 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.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶23

prp/9/10/19

¶24

W.P.(C).No.12231/2019

¶25

: 4 :

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶28

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER DATED 8/10/2015 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 15/03/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER THE KGST ACT FOR THE YEAR 2014-15. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF ORDER DATED 28/03/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER THE KGST ACT FOR THE YER 2014-15.

¶29

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF LETTER DATED 14.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF TOURISM, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.

¶30

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

¶31

//TRUE COPY//

¶32

P.S. TO JUDGE

Hotelsaj Luciya, v. Assistant Commissioner-Iii (Assessment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hotelsaj Luciya, v. Assistant Commissioner-Iii (Assessment)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parakkadavil Mohammed Kunju Ansari Vs the Income Tax Officer

Joy Alukkas Private Limited, Vs the Commissioner of Customs

K.Jafarkhan, Vs Deputy Tahsildar

Kollam Internet Cable Distribution Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Tax Officer

A.F.Babu Vs Union of India

P.K.Joy Vs State Tax Officer(Ib)