Allowed

E.P.Brothers v. State Tax Officer

Kerala HC4 Aug 2023WP(C)/13382/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 26.03.2019 proposing taxable turnover. The court held the notice was beyond the six-year limitation period for reopening the assessment. Consequently, the Assessing Authority lacked jurisdiction, and the notice was set aside.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice dated 26.03.2019 (Ex.P2) is set aside as it is beyond the limitation period and without jurisdiction.

E.P.Brothers Vs State Tax Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 13382 OF 2019

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

M/S.E.P.BROTHERS

¶7

NO.5/401-402, MANISSERY, VANIYAMKULAM, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER E.P. CHITRESH AGED 54, S/O.E.P.MADHAVAN NAIR.

¶8

BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SMT.K.KRISHNA

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE TAX OFFICER

¶11

STATE GST DEPARTMENT, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD-679104.

¶12

2 THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TAX TOWERS, KILLIPPALAM, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P.(C) No.13382/2019

¶15

-2-

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed impugning the notice dated 26.03.2019 issued by the State Tax Officer, Ottappalam, proposing the balance taxable turnover at Rs.92,81,074/-.

¶18

The Assessment year in question is 2011-12. The five-year time period for completion of the assessment expired on 31.03.2017. The Legislature amended the KVAT Act 2003, and Section 25(1) got amended whereby one-year extended period for completion of assessment was provided to the Assessing Authority. This amendment was incorporated by the Kerala Finance Act 2017 with effect from 01.04.2017.

¶19

Even if it is considered that the extended period of limitation of one year would be available to the Assessing Authority, in the case of Assessment Year 2011-12, the impugned notice is beyond the limitation period of six years.

¶20

W.P.(C) No.13382/2019

¶21

-3-

¶22

According to the said notice, the Assessing Authority had tried to reopen the assessment, which got completed on 17.04.2018, i.e., within the extended period of one year.

¶23

I find that the impugned notice is beyond the limitation prescribed under the Statute. The Assessing Authority does not have the power to reopen the assessment beyond the factual period of six years. Therefore, the said notice appears to be without jurisdiction. Ext.P2 is hereby set aside.

¶24

The present writ petition is allowed.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE

¶27

jjj

¶28

W.P.(C) No.13382/2019

¶29

-4-

¶30

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13382/2019

¶31

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1(a) True copy of the circular 10/2008 dated 10.03.2008 EXHIBIT R1(b) True copy of the order dated 10.05.2019 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2011-12. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF ORDER IN WP9C)NO.11858/19 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

E.P.Brothers v. State Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.P.Brothers v. State Tax Officer

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

Joy Jacob Vs Thiruvalla Municipality

M/S.Vysali Pharamaceuticals Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner

Bestin Joy Vs State of Kerala

Alfa Ventures (P) Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Binoy Francis Vs Union of India

Santhamma Abraham Vs State of Kerala