High Court Kerala High Court

Reliance Generators Pvt.Ltd vs Sales Tax Officer on 19 February, 2008

Kerala High Court
Reliance Generators Pvt.Ltd vs Sales Tax Officer on 19 February, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 5416 of 2008(T)


1. RELIANCE GENERATORS PVT.LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SALES TAX OFFICER, WORKS CONTRACT,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.V.LAKSHMANAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :19/02/2008

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                       ===============

               W.P.(C) Nos. 5416 & 5427 OF 2008

              ========================


            Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008


                            J U D G M E N T

In WP(C) No.5416/08, what is under challenge is Ext.P39,

an order of assessment issued on 10/7/06 for the assessment

year 1995-96, which was passed pursuant to Ext.P36 order

passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Trivandrum.

2. Similarly in WP(C) 5427/08, what is under challenge is

Ext.P113, an appellate order passed by the Deputy Commissioner

of Appeals, Trivandrum on 25/4/2006 in relation to the

assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98.

3. In my view, both these writ petitions are liable to be

dismissed on the ground of delay and latches on the part of the

petitioner. There is absolutely no explanation, muchless any

satisfactory explanation, forthcoming from the petitioner to

justify inordinate delay in challenging these orders. Learned

counsel for the writ petitioner contended that since he is raising

WPC 5416 & 5427/08

:2 :

issues touching upon the jurisdiction of the authorities to have

levied tax under the KGST Act and constitutional questions. In

my view that is no justification for the delay and latches on the

part of the petitioner. That apart, if the petitioner was aggrieved,

they should have pursued the statutory remedies available

against the impugned orders.

For the aforesaid reasons, these writ petitions are liable to

be dismissed and I do so.

ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE.

Rp