Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 188 - HC - GSTValidity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act - Non-consideration of other grounds raised before the single member bench of the HC - Time limitation for completion of proceedings - HELD THAT - The issue is already decided in the case of M/S. SHEEN GOLDEN JEWELS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE STATE TAX OFFICER (IB) -1, AND OTHERS 2019 (2) TMI 300 - KERALA HIGH COURT where it was held that the petitioner's plea is rejected that the State lacks the vires to graft Section 174 into KSGST Act, 2017. A remittance of the writ petition for a fresh consideration and disposal on the grounds raised other than validity of Section 174, would suffice to meet the ends of justice - writ petition is restored on to the files of this Court.
Issues Involved:
Challenge to judgment in WP(C) No. 402/2019 regarding dismissal of writ petition challenging assessment and demand notices issued for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 under Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act), constitutional validity of Section 174 of Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act (KSGST Act), consideration of limitation question in the writ petition. Analysis: The appellant challenged the judgment in WP(C) No. 402/2019 which dismissed the writ petition challenging the assessment and demand notices issued for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act). The main contention was that the assessment proceedings were initiated beyond the time limit specified under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. Additionally, the constitutional validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act (KSGST Act) was questioned. The writ petition was dismissed citing a previous judgment in WP(C) No. 11335/2018 which had already addressed similar issues. The appellant's counsel argued that the Single Judge failed to consider the ground raised regarding the limitation question. It was clarified that the challenge with respect to the assessment finalized for the year 2012-13 was not being pursued, but the challenge regarding the assessment for the year 2011-12 based on the limitation question needed to be examined. It was acknowledged by the Government Pleader representing the respondents that the previous judgment in WP(C) No. 11335/2018 only dealt with the validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act. Given this, and the fact that several writ appeals against that judgment were pending, it was deemed appropriate to remit the writ petition for fresh consideration specifically on the limitation issue raised against the assessment order for the year 2011-12. Consequently, the writ appeal was allowed, the judgment in WP(C) No. 402/2019 was set aside, and the writ petition was restored for fresh consideration by the Single Judge on the validity of the assessment order under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. Any interim stay order in place against the collection and recovery of amounts covered under the assessment order was to be revived and continued until further proceedings.
|