THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM Versus M\/s. AKSHAYA JEWELLERS
VAT and Sales Tax
2019 (2) TMI 1290 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-2-2019
O.T. Rev. No.103 of 2018
CST, VAT & Sales Tax
MR K.VINOD CHANDRAN AND MR ASHOK MENON, JJ.
\nFor The Petitioner : ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
\nFor The Respondent : ADVS. SMT.K.KRISHNA SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.C.S.ARUN SHANKAR SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON
\nORDER
\nVinod Chandran,J.
\nThe delay petition is coming up for consideration and the delay is of 647 days.
\n2. The assessment order was passed on 31.10.2014. An appeal was filed by the assessee, which the first appellate <\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n order of the AO, the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. The mistake was only insofar as the TIN number having not been properly quoted by the AO, the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. The AO noticed this mistake and rectified its record on 18.02.2017. The AO also took up proceedings for rectification of the appellate orders. We see that the order of the first appellate authority was sought to be rectified by the AO after one year of his order, by a letter dated 16.03.2018 which was corrected by order dated 03.04.2018 at Annexure-B. There was a subsequent rectification application filed before the Tribunal also, which resulted in the Tribunal also passing a rectified order on 26.06.2018. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM Versus M\/s. AKSHAYA JEWELLERSVAT and Sales Tax2019 (2) TMI 1290 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMIKERALA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 18-2-2019O.T. Rev. No.103 of 2018 CST, VAT & Sales TaxMR K.VINOD CHANDRAN AND MR ASHOK … Continue reading “THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (LAW), STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM Versus M\/s. AKSHAYA JEWELLERS”<\/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-16948","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16948","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=16948"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16948\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16948"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16948"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16948"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. In fact, the proceedings taken<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n