KANIYAMPARAMBIL STEELS Versus THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICE, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI AND THE BRANCH MANAGER, KADUTHURUTHY
GST
2018 (10) TMI 1518 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 5-9-2018
RP. No. 703 of 2018 IN WP (C). 13980\/2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : Adv. Aji V. Dev
\nORDER
\nThis Court on 19th July 2018 disposed of WP(C) No.13980 of 2018 with the following direction:
\n “In the light of the Division Bench's decision in W.A. No. 1802 of 2017, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the competent authority to complete the adjudication under Section 129 of the CGST Act, <\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n amus or any other writ or order or direction staying any step to invoke Ext.P4 bank guarantee pursuant to Exhibit P7 proceedings until filing an appeal under the CGST\/SGST Acts. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" KANIYAMPARAMBIL STEELS Versus THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICE, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI AND THE BRANCH MANAGER, KADUTHURUTHYGST2018 (10) TMI 1518 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMIKERALA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 5-9-2018RP. No. 703 of 2018 IN WP (C). 13980\/2018 GSTMR DAMA SESHADRI … Continue reading “KANIYAMPARAMBIL STEELS Versus THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICE, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI AND THE BRANCH MANAGER, KADUTHURUTHY”<\/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-14710","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14710","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=14710"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14710\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14710"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14710"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14710"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. Now the petitioner's counsel contends that pending this review petition, the petitioner has already filed a statutory appeal. It will suffice if this Court recalls its judgment under review and dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent authorities not to encash the Bank guarantee until the statutory appeal is disposed of.
\n5. The learned Government Pleader, too, has submitted that the respondent authorities will keep the Bank guarantee intact until the petitioner's appeal is disposed of.
\n6. I, therefore, recall the judgment dated <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n