2019 (1) TMI 1151 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI – Validity of assessment order – case of petitioner is that when an identical issue is pending in appeal concerning other assessment years, the authorities should not insist on the petitioner's facing one more proceeding – Held that:- This Court cannot use its power of mandamus to stultify the statutory provision. True, on an identical issue, compelling the tax payer to make pre-deposit and then contest the case may workout some hardship. But that is how the Statute has contemplated the proceedings. So long as those procedural parameters have not been called in question as illegal, this Court will not interfere – petition disposed off holding that the second respondent will dispose of the Exts.P2
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
f the Exts.P2 and P3 appeals, the petitioner also seeks an early disposal. 3. The petitioner's counsel contends that if the Exts.P2 and P3 appeals are disposed of, it will obviate any adjudication on the Ext.P5 notice. He nevertheless submits that the petitioner has already replied to the Ext.P5. In this context, he submits that, now, on an identical issue, the petitioner is compelled to fight another round of litigation after paying a huge amount as pre-deposit. 4. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Customs Department, on the other hand, fairly concedes that the appellate authority will consider the Exts.P2 and P3 appeals expeditiously. 5. As to the Ext.P5 notice, the learned Senior Standing Counsel assures the Court that as t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =