M\/s. G.K. GRANITES LTD. Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, PERUMBAVOOR, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOCHI AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOCHI
VAT and Sales Tax
2018 (9) TMI 1190 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 435 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 27-3-2018
W.P. (C) Nos. 10221 And 10222 of 2018
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
MR P. B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : ADV. SRI. N. JAMES KOSHY
\nFor The Respondent : SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI. V. K. SHAMSUDHEEN
\nJUDGMENT
\nIn exercise of the power under Section 7(4) of the Central Sales Tax Act (the Act), the asssessing authority of the petitioners has suo motu amended the certificate of regi<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ers are orders issued under Section 7(4) of the Act. In the light of the provision contained in Section 9(2) of the Act, the remedy of the petitioners against the orders issued under Section 7(4) of the Act, has to be determined with reference to the provisions contained in the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (VAT Act). The provision corresponding to Section 7(4) of the Act in the VAT Act is Section 16(10). The question to be examined, therefore, is whether an appeal lies under the VAT Act against an order issued under Section 16(10). It is seen that Section 55(1) of the VAT Act dealing with the right of appeal against orders issued under the said statute has been amended in terms of the provisions contained in the Finance Act, 2017. Section 55(<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n the rank of a Commercial Tax Officer.” = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. G.K. GRANITES LTD. Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, PERUMBAVOOR, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOCHI AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOCHIVAT and Sales Tax2018 (9) TMI 1190 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 435 (Ker.)KERALA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 27-3-2018W.P. (C) Nos. 10221 … Continue reading “M\/s. G.K. GRANITES LTD. Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, PERUMBAVOOR, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), KOCHI AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOCHI”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13880","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13880","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13880"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13880\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13880"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13880"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13880"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nIn the light of the aforesaid amended provision, the petitioners are entitled to prefer appeals challenging the orders issued under Section 7(4) of the Act. It is seen that the impugned orders have been rendered without taking note of the amendment introduced to Section 55(1) of the VAT Act in terms of the provisions contained in Finance Act, 2017.
\nIn the result, the writ petitions are allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the second respondent is directed to pass fresh orders on the appeals preferred by the petitioners in accordance with law, after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing. This shall be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.<<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n