2020 (11) TMI 752 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Stay on recovery steps - Section 55 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act 2003 - HELD THAT - This Court find that Exts.P1 P1(a) and P1(b) orders of assessment made by the 1st respondent are under challenge in Exts.P3 P3(a) and P3(b) appeals filed before the 2nd respondent appellate authority which are accompanied by Exts.P4 P4(a) and P4(b) stay applications. This writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent appellate authority to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P4 P4(a) and P4(b) stay applications within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner - Till such time any recovery steps pursuant to Exts.P1 P1(a) and P1(b) assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance by respondents 1and 3.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in disposal of appeals and stay applications by the 2nd respondent.
2. Attempted initiation of recovery proceedings by respondents 1 and 3 before the disposal of stay applications.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, an assessee under the 1st respondent, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus to compel the 2nd respondent to dispose of appeals and stay applications related to assessment orders. The petitioner challenged assessment orders for the years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16, and moved appeals invoking provisions under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The petitioner sought relief from recovery steps pending the disposal of appeals and stay applications.

2. The High Court noted that assessment orders were under challenge in appeals accompanied by stay applications before the 2nd respondent appellate authority. The government pleader assured that the 2nd respondent would consider and pass orders on the stay applications within two months. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent to decide on the stay applications within two months from the date of the judgment, with notice to the petitioner. Until then, recovery steps pursuant to the assessment orders were ordered to be suspended by respondents 1 and 3.