Revenue filed a tax revision challenging the Tribunal's order that allowed the assessees second appeal and set aside the VAT assessment and penalty. Upholding a prior order, the Court dismissed the revision as unsustainable.
The revision petition was dismissed sustaining the Tribunal's order allowing the appeal and setting aside the assessment.
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 S.V.BHATTI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA,
1944
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
TAVAT 268/2019 OF AGRL.I.T.ADDITIONAL BENCH,KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), DEPARTMENT OF KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM.
BY GP, SMT JASMINE
RESPONDENT/S:
STEEL EMPORIUM SOUTH BAZAR, KANNUR 670 002.
BY ADVS. SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN SMT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN SRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN
THIS OTHER TAX REVISION (VAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
S.V.BHATTI & BASANT BALAJI, JJ.
ORDER
(Dated this the 6th day of December 2022)
Basant Balaji J.,
This revision is filed challenging the order of the Tribunal in TA (VAT) No.268 of 2019 dated 30.9.2019. The second appeal was filed against the order of assessment made by the Sales Tax Officer confirmed by the
first appellate authority.
M.S. TMT Tor etc. On 17.03.2016, the Intelligence Inspector Squad No.II, Commercial Taxes, Tirur, intercepted the vehicle with Reg.No.HR55F-8889, with
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
-3-
goods transported by the respondent and on verification, it was found that the only document accompanied with the goods was the invoice of M/s.P.H.Mohammed Kunju and Brothers, Ernakulam, dated 12.03.2016 to the respondent noting the place of delivery at Tirur. The Intelligence Inspector found that the date of detention was on 17.03.2016 and the date of invoice was on 12.03.2016 and there is a delay of four days. Accordingly, a notice in Form No.17-A was issued to the respondent affording an opportunity to show cause for the defects noted in the said notice or to furnish security for the release of the goods. The respondent approached this court by filing W.P.(C) No.11042 of 2016, and as per the judgment dated 22.03.2016 directed to release the goods and vehicle on
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
payment of 30% of the security amount demanded and furnishing simple bond for the balance amount. Thereafter, the files were submitted to the Intelligence Officer, Squad No.IV, Commercial Taxes, Kannur, for conducting enquiry and after obtaining the reply filed by the petitioner, the Intelligence Officer found that Form No.15/delivery note which is a mandatory requirement for transportation of goods was not accompanied with the goods and hence, vide order dated 20.11.2011, imposed a penalty of Rs.1,29,155/-, after adjusting security deposit and demanded balance penalty amount. The final assessment was completed on 30.11.2017. Aggrieved by the final assessment, the assessee filed the first appeal as VATA 58
of 2018. The First Appellate Authority/ Assistant
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
Commissioner (Appeals), Kannur, dismissed VATA No.58 of 2018 against which TA(VAT) No.268 of 2019 was filed by the petitioner. Impugning the order imposing penalty,
the respondents filed TA(VAT) No.967 of 2018 before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has already found that there is no turnover suppression on the part of the assessee warranting the judgment/assessment and therefore the second appeal was allowed. Importing the same reasons, the second appeal regarding the assessment was allowed. Challenging the order of the Tribunal, this revision is filed by the State under Section 63 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003.
the order passed by the Tribunal setting aside the order of
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
-6-
the Intelligence Officer imposing penalty is correct. In
view of the said order, this revision challenging the order
of the Tribunal allowing the appeal and setting aside the assessment has to be sustained and we do so. There is no illegality and impropriety in the order passed by the Tribunal and the revision fails, accordingly.
In the result, this Revision Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTI, JUDGE
sd/-
BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE
dl/
OT.REV NO. 65 OF 2020
-7-
APPENDIX OF OT.REV 65/2020
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 25(1) OF KVAT ACT DATED 30.11.2017 BEARING NO. 32120224964/201516 PASSED BY THE STATE TX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRD CIRCLE, KANNUR. ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.11.2018 IN KVATA NO. 58 OF 2018. ANNEXURE C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN T.A. (VAT) NO. 268 OF 2019 DATED 30.09.2019.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal's order allowing the appeal and setting aside the VAT assessment is liable to be reversed under Section 63 of the KVAT Act.
Whether there is any illegality or impropriety in the Tribunal's decision to set aside the penalty assessment.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State of Kerala Represented by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax
Steel Emporium South Bazar
S.V. Bhatti
Basant Balaji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
