Petitioner challenged penalty orders imposed under Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act after appellate authority set aside earlier orders without remanding matter. Court held subsequent penalty orders were beyond jurisdiction and allowed petition setting them aside.
Impugned penalty orders (Ext.P4, P4A, P4B) set aside.
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 DINESH KUMAR SINGH
FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 28TH ASWINA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 189 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
RAMADA
PUNNAMADA, ALAPPUZHA-685612
REPRESENTED BY ITS (AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY) BONNY
ALOYSIUS.
BY ADVS.
P.N.DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI
HRITHWIK D. NAMBOOTHIRI
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO.1, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, ALAPPUZHA-688 001.2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-II STATE GST DEPARTMENT, ASHRAMAM, KOLLAM-691 002.3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INT) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, ANNEXE BUILDING, EAST OF TOWN SQUARE, ALAPPUZHA-688 013.THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 189 OF 2022
2
DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.
--------------------------------------------
WP(C) NO. 189 OF 2022
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of October, 2023
J U D G M E N T
by the petitioner impugning Ext.P4, P4A & P4B penalty orders passed by the 1st respondent. Penalty was imposed under Section 17(A) of Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976 and a penalty of Rs.1,13,70,000/- being the double the amount of
tax sought to be evaded was imposed on the petitioner for the assessment year 2015-16 in Ext.P1 order. Similarly, in the year 2016-17, penalty of Rs.1,09,50,000/- was imposed and for the assessment year 2017-18 penalty of Rs.22,39,772/- was imposed.
3
WP(C) NO. 189 OF 2022
appellate authority by Ext.P2 common order set aside the penalty orders on the ground that the suppression and omission must be clearly disclosed
from the materials available and there should be evidence of the amount sought to be suppressed from the turnover. It is also stated that the intelligence officer could not clearly prove such a suppression or omission. However, it is said that
any loss caused to the state exchequer based on the material that relied on by the intelligence officer, the same should be compensated by resorting to best judgment assessment. These penalty orders were set aside without remanding the matter back to the assessing authority for passing a fresh order.
4
WP(C) NO. 189 OF 2022
imposed and was set aside by Ext.P2 order and has again been levied.
Sd/-
DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE
rpr
WP(C) NO. 189 OF 2022
5
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 189/2022
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITSExhibit P1 |
TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.CR.1/2018-19(15-16) DATED 22.04.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2015-16U/S .17 (A) OF KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|
Exhibit P1A |
TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.CR.1/2018-19(2016-17) DATED 22.04.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2016-17U/S .17 (A) OF KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
Exhibit P1B |
TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER NO.CR.1/2018-19(2017-18) DATED 22.04.2019 FOR THE YEAR 2017-18U/S .17 (A) OF KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT ISSUEDBY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
Exhibit P2 |
TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON APPELLATE ORDER NO.KLT(ALPY).86/19,87/19 & 88/19 DATED 30.11.2020 FORTHE YEARS 2015-16,2016-17 & 2017-18 ISSUED BY THE2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
Exhibit P3 |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO,CR.1/2018-19 (2015-16), FOR THE YEAR 2015-16 DATED 08.11.2021U/S.17(A) OF KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT ISSUED BYTHE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
Exhibit P3 A |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO,CR.1/2018-19 (2016-17), FOR THE YEAR 2016-17 DATED 08.11.2021U/S.17(A) OF KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT ISSUED BYTHE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
Exhibit P3 B |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.CR.1/2018-19 (2017-18), FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 08.11.2021U/S.17(A) OF KERALA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT ISSUED BYTHE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
Exhibit P4 |
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2021 BEARINGNO.CR.1/2018-19 (2015-16) FOR THE YEAR 2015-16,ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
Exhibit P4 A |
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2021 BEARINGNO.CR.1/2018-19 (2016-17) FOR THE YEAR 2016-17,ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
Exhibit P4 B |
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.11.2021 BEARINGNO.CR.1/2018-19 (2017-18) FOR THE YEAR 2017-18,ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether penalty orders passed by the assessing authority after setting aside earlier penalty orders by appellate authority valid. in absence of remand to pass fresh order.
Whether the assessing authority had jurisdiction to impose penalty de novo without remand instead best judgment assessment. compensation for loss to state exchequer.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
RAMADA
THE STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO.1, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, ALAPPUZHA-688 001
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)-II STATE GST DEPARTMENT, ASHRAMAM, KOLLAM
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INT) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, ALAPPUZHA-688 013
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court