M/S.Kamala Provision Stores vs Commercial Tax Officer(Audit … on 4 August, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22334 of 2008(H)


1. M/S.KAMALA PROVISION STORES
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER(AUDIT ASSESSMENT)
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

 Dated :04/08/2008

 O R D E R
                         K. M. JOSEPH, J.
                  --------------------------------------
                   W.P.C. NO. 22334 OF 2008 H
                   --------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 4th August, 2008

                             JUDGMENT

Petitioner seeks modification of Ext.P1 assessment order.

Petitioner has been assessed to tax. According to petitioner,

petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the third proviso to Section

6 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, as the turnover had not

exceeded Rs.10 Lakhs in the earlier year, it is only for the

amount in excess of Rs.10 Lakhs that the petitioner is liable to

pay tax. Learned Government Pleader, on the other hand,

submits that the petitioner may not be entitled to the benefit of

the same in so far as the petitioner must be treated as an importer

and the benefit of the third proviso to Section 6 of the Act is not

available to an importer and having regard to the fact that the

petitioner has effected purchase from unregistered dealers, it is

liable to pay tax under Section 6(2) of the Act. Anyway, the

petitioner has preferred Ext.P2. I feel that a decision should be

taken thereon in accordance with law. Without expressing any

WPC. 22334/08 H 2

view on the merits of the matter or even regarding the

maintainability of the petition, there will be a direction to the

first respondent to consider and take a decision on Ext.P2 in

accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Till such time as a

decision is taken, recovery proceedings against the petitioner

will be kept in abeyance.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/=
K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE

kbk.

//True Copy//

PS to Judge