TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court Kerala allows writ appeal, directing reevaluation on limitation issue under Kerala Value Added Tax Act.</h1> The High Court of Kerala allowed the writ appeal, setting aside a previous judgment and restoring the writ petition for fresh consideration by a Single ... Constitutional Validity of Section 174 of KSGST Act - time limitation u/s 25(1) of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The issue covered by the decision in the cas 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. Petition dismissed. Issues:Challenge to assessment order for the assessment year 2011-2012 under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act based on limitation provided under Section 25(1) and constitutional validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State General Sales Tax Act.The High Court of Kerala, in a judgment delivered by Justice Abdul Rehim, addressed the appeal challenging the dismissal of a writ petition (W.P.(C) 25748/2018) concerning an assessment order (Ext.P1) for the assessment year 2011-2012. The appellant contested the assessment's limitation under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and the constitutional validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State General Sales Tax Act. The writ petition was dismissed along with other cases, citing a previous judgment (W.P.(C) 11335/2018) from January 11, 2019, which covered the issue against the petitioner. However, the appellant argued that the previous judgment only addressed the validity of Section 174 of the KSGST Act, omitting the consideration of the limitation issue raised in the present petition. The Court acknowledged this discrepancy and decided to remit the writ petition for a fresh consideration by the Single Judge, excluding the validity of Section 174.The High Court allowed the writ appeal, setting aside the impugned judgment of January 11, 2019, and restoring the writ petition for fresh consideration by the Single Judge. The Court directed the Registry to post the writ petition for reconsideration, focusing on the pending limitation issue while maintaining the interim order's revival until further notice. This decision ensures a comprehensive review of the limitation question raised in the assessment case, distinct from the previously addressed constitutional validity matter, providing a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their arguments and seek a just resolution.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
