ANIRUDHAN V. Versus THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CUSTOMS, INDIRECT TAXES AND NARCOTICS, HARYANA, THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1084 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 514 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 14-12-2018
WP (C). No. 32945 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.M.RAJAGOPAL
\nFor The Respondent : ADV. SRI.SUVIN R.MENON, CGC
\nJUDGMENT
\nThe petitioner desires to practice as “GST Practitioner” in terms of Rule 83 of the CGST Rules. The first respondent issued the Ext.P2 notification, inviting applications for the examination to be he<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n yond the cut off date, the first respondent decided to conduct another examination on 17th December 2018. In other words, even if the petitioner had not filed this writ petition and had not got the interim direction to write the exam, he would have had the second opportunity: examination on 17th December 2018. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" ANIRUDHAN V. Versus THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CUSTOMS, INDIRECT TAXES AND NARCOTICS, HARYANA, THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHIGST2018 (12) TMI 1084 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 514 (Ker.)KERALA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 14-12-2018WP (C). No. 32945 … Continue reading “ANIRUDHAN V. Versus THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CUSTOMS, INDIRECT TAXES AND NARCOTICS, HARYANA, THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI”<\/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-15595","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15595","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=15595"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15595\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15595"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15595"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15595"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. I reckon this second opportunity obviates any adjudication in this writ petition on merits. Initially, the petitioner apprehended that he would not get a chance to write the examination, because his application was processed beyond the cut off date. Now as a matter of policy, the first respondent has condoned the lapse and is allowing all other persons to write the examination. The petitioner has, however, already gone through tha<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n