9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 466 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of pre-assessment notice - it is contended that the assessment proposed is barred under Section 25 (1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - KVAT Act - Held that - The only question considered was regarding validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act and that the ground raised in the present writ petition challenging the pre-assessment on the basis of bar of limitation under Section 25 (1) of the KVAT Act, was not considered - the matter need to be remitted for fresh consideration and disposal by the Single Judge - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Challenge to pre-assessment notice under KVAT Act based on limitation and constitutional validity of Section 174 of Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act. Analysis: The petitioner challenged a pre-assessment notice under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, for the year 2009-2010, primarily on the grounds of limitation under Section 25 (1) of the KVAT Act and the constitutional validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, citing a previous judgment that covered similar issues. The appellant contended that the previous judgment did not address the limitation issue raised in the present petition. The Special Government Pleader acknowledged this oversight, leading the Court to remit the matter for fresh consideration by the Single Judge. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned judgment and restoring the writ petition for fresh consideration by the Single Judge specifically on the question of limitation under Section 25 (1) of the KVAT Act. The registry was directed to post the petition before the relevant Single Judge as per the roster. Additionally, any interim stay order in place at the time of the writ petition's dismissal was to be revived and continued. In conclusion, the High Court of Kerala found merit in the appellant's argument regarding the limitation issue not being addressed in the previous judgment, leading to the decision to remit the matter for fresh consideration. The judgment highlights the importance of addressing all grounds raised in a petition and ensuring comprehensive examination of legal issues before making a decision.
|
