High Court of Kerala quashed two writ petitions challenging tax notices issued under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, ruling them barred by limitation per prevailing Supreme Court and Division Bench precedents.
The impugned orders in these writ petitions are quashed and the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.
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 P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2024 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 13350 OF 2016
PETITIONER/S:
TRIVENI AGENCIES 34/1780, HIGH SCHOOL JUNCTION, N.H.ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI - 682 024.
BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY SRI.R.SREEJITH KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH
RESPONDENT/S:
SRI.SAYED M.THANGAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.07.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).16708/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(C) Nos. 13350 & 16708 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2024 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 16708 OF 2016
PETITIONER/S:
M/S. RENT WORKS INDIA (P) LTD 102-107, GATEWAY PLAZ, 1ST FLOOR,HIRANANDANI GARDEN, POWAI,MUMBAI-400 076, REP. BY ASST. MANAGER TUSHAR SHARAD DHAKA
BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY SRI.R.SREEJITH KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH
RESPONDENT/S:
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE-I,ERNAKULAM - 682 015.
SRI.SAYED M.THANGAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.07.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).13350/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C) Nos. 13350 & 16708 of 2016
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2024
Essentially, both the writ petitions are preferred challenging notices issued under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. Exts.P6 and P8 in WP(C) No. 13350 of 2016 and Exts.P11 and P12 are the impugned orders.
4
W.P.(C) Nos. 13350 & 16708 of 2016
orders in these writ petitions are quashed.
These writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.
SD/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
das
5
W.P.(C) Nos. 13350 & 16708 of 2016
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16708/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| P1 | TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 19.3.2014 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOCHI-15. |
|---|---|
| P2 | TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29.9.2014 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOCHI-15. |
| P3 | TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11.9.2014 FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT |
| P4 | TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 11.9.2014 FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT |
| P5 | TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 10.12.2014 OF THE PETITONER |
| P6 | TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 25.9.2014 OF THE PETITIONER |
| P8 | TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 1.12.2015 OF THE RESPONDENT |
| P9 | TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 8.1.2016 FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08 OF THE PETITIONER |
| P10 | TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 8.1.2016 FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 OF THE PETITIONER |
| P11 | TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29.2.2016 FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08 OF THE RESPONDENT |
| P12 | TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29.2.2016 FOR THE A.Y.2008-09 OF THE RESPONDENT. |
6
W.P.(C) Nos. 13350 & 16708 of 2016
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13350/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| P1 | TRUE COPY OF ISSUED BY THE |
THE 1ST |
NOTICE DATED 27.02.2016 RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|---|---|
| P2 | TRUE COPY OF ISSUED BY THE |
THE 1ST |
NOTICE DATED 08.06.2015 RESPONDENT. |
| P3 | TRUE COPY OF FILED BY THE |
THE PETIT |
REPLY DATED 25.06.2015 IONER |
| P4 | TRUE COPY 30.06.2015 IN |
OF WPC |
THE JUDGMENT DATED NO.19575/2015 |
| P5 | TRUE COPY OF PRODUCED BY T |
THE HE PE |
LETTER DATED 17.08.2015 TITIONER |
| P6 | TRUE COPY OF ISSUED BY THE |
THE 1ST |
ORDER DATED 05.02.2016 RESPONDENT |
| P7 | TRUE COPY OF FILED BY THE |
THE PETIT |
LETTER DATED 26.03.2016 IONER |
| P8 | TRUE COPY OF ISSUED BY THE |
THE 1ST |
ORDER DATED 29.03.2016 RESPONDENT |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether writ petitions challenging notices issued under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act should be allowed on grounds of limitation.
Whether the impugned orders are barred by limitation in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Cholayil Pvt. Ltd. and the Division Bench judgment in Carborundum Universal Ltd.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) and Others v. M/s.Cholayil Pvt.Ltd.Explained¶31
Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) and Others v. M/s.Cholayil Pvt.Ltd. (Civil Appeal No.4306 of 2022 and connected cases)
Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes v. Carborundum Universal Ltd.Explained¶31
Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes v. Carborundum Universal Ltd. (WA No.1188 of 2017)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Triveni Agencies
Rent Works India (P) Ltd
Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Special Circle-III, Ernakulam
Deputy Commissioner, Department of Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam
Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Special Circle-I, Ernakulam
P.M.MANOJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
