Wp(C)/13795/2021 Of Jubi Philip v. Agrl. Income Tax And State Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR MONDAY, THE 12 DAY OF JULY 2021 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1943WP(C) NO. 13795 OF 2021 PETITIONER: JUBI PHILIPAGED 44 YEARSPROPRIETOR, M/S. KIZHAKKEDATH AGENCIES, PAZHAVANGADI P.O., RANNI-689673, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.BY ADVS.TOMSON T.EMMANUELBEJOY CHERIYAN RESPONDENTS: AGRL. INCOME TAX AND STATE TAX OFFICERSGST DEPARTMENT, RANNI-689673.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), SGST DEPARTMENT, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, SGST DEPARTMENT, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645 OTHER PRESENT: SPLGP.SMT.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON12.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT Learned Government Pleader appears for all the respondents. 2.Heard both sides. The petitioner submits that the petitionerhas filed 2[nd] appeal, Ext.P5 along with application for condonation ofdelay at Ext.P6 and the stay petition at Ext.P7 which are pending foradjudication before the 3[rd] respondent. The learned counsel for thepetitioner submits that the petitioner has deposited the amountequivalent to about 55% of the tax liability as per Ext.P3 and therefore,till disposal of the stay petition in the 2[nd] appeal, the respondent berestrained from effecting recovery of the assessed amount. 3.The learned Government Pleader by drawing my attention toground D of the petition submits that this Court cannot limit thediscretion to be exercised by the competent Tribunal by directing the 3[rd]respondent to consider Ext.P3 while disposing the stay petition at Ext.P7.She submits that the discretion of the appellate authority is controlled bythe statute itself. I have considered the submissions so advanced. As the 2[nd] appealis pending for consideration before the 3[rd] respondent, the petition isdisposed of with the following direction. The 3[rd] respondent to decide theapplication for condonation of delay at Ext.P6 and if found necessary thereafter, the stay application at Ext.P7 within a period of three monthsfrom the date of communication of this judgment. The petitioner tocooperate the third respondent in disposal of the stay petition if they sorequired after disposing the application for condonation of delay. Tilldisposal of the stay petition, the respondents are directed to keep therecovery proceedings in abeyance. Nsd SD/- A.M.BADAR JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13795/2021