M/s. DHANALAKSHMI TIMBERS Versus THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, PUNALUR, FAST TRACK TEAM, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, KOTTARAKKARA AND KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
VAT and Sales Tax
2018 (8) TMI 66 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 26-7-2018
W.A. No.1334 of 2018
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
Mr. K. Vinod Chandran And Mr. Ashok Menon, JJ.
For The Appellant : ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON AND SMT. K. KRISHNA
For The Respondent : SRI. MOHAMMED RAFIQ
JUDGMENT
Vinod Chandran, J:
The appellant, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 1963 [for “KGST Act”], seeks, by the writ petition, the judgment in which is impu
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
filed before the Tribunal in the year 2013. The provision under Section 17D required the assessment to be completed by a team of officers, called “Fast Track Team”, and an appeal is provided only to the Tribunal. The appeal also had a pre-condition of deposit of the tax demanded on assessment. These were measures brought out only to specifically see that the assessments under the earlier tax regime is completed in a time bound manner. It is also submitted that the appeal under Section 17D has to be filed within 45 days and there is no provision for condonation of delay. The appeal filed by the appellant was grossly delayed and the pre-condition also was not satisfied. Hence, there is no appeal pending before the Tribunal and it is also subm
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
r the sustainability of Exhibit P4 as of now, since the appellant is guilty of laches on account of the long delay. The appellant is said to have filed an appeal itself in the year 2011, belatedly too. The pre-condition of deposit of the tax demanded was also not satisfied. The appellant also did not choose to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution at that point. We also see that Exhibit P4 was issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Irinjalakuda on 17.12.2013. The writ petition itself is filed in the year 2018. Considering the entire circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain the appeal and we find no infirmity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge.
The Writ Appeal is dismissed, leaving the parties to suffer th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =