2020 (5) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion. 2. Exts.P1 and P2 orders passed by the Ist respondent, in exercise of power vested under Section 56 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('KVAT Act' for short) were under challenge in the writ petition. The Single Judge found that, the impugned orders do not suffer from any jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice or contravention of statutory provisions. Therefore it was found that, there exists no special circumstances to invoke the powers vested on this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the impugned orders, especially when an effective alternative remedy by way of Revision under Section 59 of the Act is available, before the Commissioner. Being confronted with such situ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... orders were passed by the Deputy Commissioner in total ignorance of the amended provisions and also ignoring the observations contained in Ext.P5 judgment. It is also contended that, with respect to the other assessment years of 2008-2009, the appellate authority itself had accepted the contentions and passed favourable assessments through Ext.P10 order. It is the further contention that, the judgment relied upon by the Ist respondent, Ext.P8, cannot be taken as a ground to cancel the modified assessments. It is also pointed out that, the above aspect was clarified by the Division Bench itself in a Review Petition filed, through Ext.P9 order. According to learned counsel for the appellant, all the above aspects which were pointed out befor....