Wp(C)/3789/2014 Of Baby Antony v. The Agrl. Income Tax And Commercial Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/17TH MAGHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 3789 of 2014 (W) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):-------------------------- BABY ANTONY, PROPRIETOR, ENVEES INN BAR, ERAMALLOOR, PIN:682 584. BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE AGRL. INCOME TAX AND COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KUTHIATHODE, PIN:682 584. DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KUTHIATHODE, PIN:682 584. 2. THE INSPECTING ASST. COMMISSIONER, DEPT. OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ALAPPUZHA-688 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WP(C).No. 3789 of 2014 (W) ----------------------------------------APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:--------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO.32041877106/2012-13DATED 23.10.2013. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 8.11.2013. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 13.11.2013. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:------------------------------------------N I L /TRUE COPY/P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.W.P.C. No.3789 OF 2014 --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Dated this the 6[th] day of February, 2014. JUDGMENT The petitioner is running a Bar attached hotel under thename and style 'Envees Inn Bar' and is an assessee under therelevant provisions of law. For the year 2012-2013, the petitioneropted for payment of tax on liquor under the KGST Act and whichwas permitted and the petitioner remitted the tax amount ofRs.28,58,654/- by way of instalments. But after the assessmentyear was over, it was noticed that the compounded rate on thepurchase value of liquor was higher than the compounded taxpaid or payable for any of the previous consecutive three yearsas fixed and the tax due was re-fixed at Rs.35,49,960/- videExt.P1 order. Since the petitioner was not in a position to remitthe due amount in lump, he submitted Ext.P2 letter requestinginstalment facility before the 1[st] respondent and Ext.P3 requestbefore the 2[nd] respondent. But respondents 1 and 2 have not taken any positive steps on Exts.P2 and P3 and hence the writpetition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. After hearing both the sides and also after consideringthe extent of tax to be cleared, this Court finds it fit and properto have the matter finalized by granting some instalments tosatisfy the entire liability as above. Accordingly, the petitioner ispermitted to clear the entire arrears by way of 'eight' equalmonthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on orbefore the 28[th] day of February, 2014; to be followed by similarinstalments to be effected on or before the last working day ofthe succeeding months. This shall be in addition to the liability toremit the 'Current tax' as well. Subject to this, recoveryproceedings in respect of the arrears based on Ext.P1 order shallbe kept in abeyance for the time being. If any default iscommitted by the petitioner in this regard, it is open for therespondents to proceed with further steps for realization of theentire amount in a lump, from the stage where it stands now. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondentfor further steps. The writ petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp