Disposed

Lee Builders v. the State Tax Officer

Kerala HC5 Jan 2022WP(C)/193/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This leave to issue (implied disposal without reference) in a writ petition filed by Lee Builders regarding a penalty order under GST. The High Court of Kerala directed the 3rd respondent to consider petitions for condonation of delay and stay within three months and kept coercive proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to consider petitions for delay condonation and stay within three months; coercive proceedings kept in abeyance.

Lee Builders Vs the State Tax Officer — GST and Indirect Tax | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 15TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 193 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

LEE BUILDERS, LEE GARDENS, M.C.ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI.BABU THOMAS.

¶8

BY ADVS. AJI V.DEV ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV S.SAJEEVAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, SQUAD NO.VII, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, STATE TAX COMPLEX, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM - 686 015 (FORMERLY INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, COMMERCIAL TAXES).

¶11

2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER, WORKS CONTRACT, STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX, BAZAR ROAD, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI - 682 002.

¶12

3 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX, THEVARA, PERUMANOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM - 686 015.

¶13

4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER STATE GOODS & SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, MINI CIVIL STATION, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 669.

¶14

BY SENIOR GOVT.PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 193 OF 2022

¶17

¶18

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶19

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶20

W.P.(C) No.193 of 2022

¶21

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶22

Dated this the 5^th day of January, 2022

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Aggrieved by Ext.P2 order of penalty relating to assessment year 2016-17, petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal before the 3^rd respondent, along with Ext.P4(a) petition for condoning delay of 833 days in filing Ext.P4 appeal. A petition for stay of proceedings pursuant to the penalty order has also been filed as Ext.P4(b). Petitioner apprehends coercive proceedings to be effected even before the petition for stay is considered. Hence this writ petition.

¶25

Having considered the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents, I am of the opinion that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with a direction.

¶26

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4(a) delay condonation petition as well as Ext.P4(b) stay petition, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such a decision is taken, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶30

RKM

¶31

WP(C) NO. 193 OF 2022

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 193/2022

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶35

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.39553 OF 2016 DATED 14/12/2016.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED DATED 30/06/2019.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 05/09/2019.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED FOR 2016- 17 DATED 28/12/2021.
Exhibit P4A	A TRUE COPY OF THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION DATED 28/12/2021.
Exhibit P4B	A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 28/12/2021.

Lee Builders v. the State Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lee Builders v. the State Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

National Radio Electronics Corporation Vs State Tax Officer (Intelligence)

Shylesh K. Vs the Authorized Officer, Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Jose M Panikkulam Vs Irinjalakkuda Town Co-Operative Bank

Maniyammal Vs Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Gmmco Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

Cynosure Power Systems Vs Assistant Commissioner (Works Contract)