TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 581
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in this writ petition is whether the impugned assessment order issued under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short 'the KVAT Act') by the 4th respondent is illegal and without jurisdiction. 2. The short facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner herein is a private limited company and an assessee under the KVAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short 'the CST Act') on the rolls of the 4th respondent, engaged in the manufacture and sale of Ayurvedic products and medicines. 3. In compliance with the statutory requirements under the KVAT Act, the petitioner submitted returns under the KVAT Act as well as the CST Act for the assessment year 2011-12. The petitioner reported inter-State sales, inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner, the said amendment has no retrospective effect. It is contended that the period of limitation can only be reckoned based on the law in force during the relevant assessment year. It is further submitted that, in the absence of any express provision making the amendment retrospective, it cannot be presumed that the extended period of six years would apply to the assessment year ending on 31.03.2017. 8. A proviso was also introduced to Section 25, whereby the period for completing assessments that expired on 31.03.2017 was extended up to 31.03.2018. However, the petitioner contends that, the self-assessment by the petitioner/assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 was sought to be re-opened by the assessing authority in terms of Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herwise expire on 31.03.2018, stood extended by a further period of one year, i.e., up to 31.03.2019. 12. This, according to the petitioner, clearly indicates that the assessment for the year 2011-12 ought to have been completed on or before 31.03.2018 in the normal course, and only by virtue of the amendment, the period was extended up to 31.03.2019. Therefore, it is contended that the statutory scheme envisages a maximum period of six years for completion of assessment, leaving no scope for issuance of notice beyond the prescribed period or for keeping the assessment proceedings pending thereafter. 13. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the period for completion of assessment, as contemplated under Section 25, was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....18 (3) KLT 877], M/s. Paharpur Cooling Tower Limited v. State of Kerala [WA No. 254 of 2017) Division Bench reference order dated 23.02.2022, MCP Enterprises and others v. State of Kerala and others [2020 (2) KLT 295], State of Kerala and others v. MCP Enterprises [2020 (6) KTL Online 1091], M/s. Cherian Varkey Construction Company (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala [ WPC No.656 of 2019] Single Bench, Lisy P.T. v. State Tax Officer [WPC No.37338 of 2018] Single Bench, State of Punjab and others v. M/s. Shreyans Indus Ltd. Etc. [2016(3) TMI 331-Supreme Court]. 17. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the assessment proceedings commencing with issuance of notice on 25.01.2018 is time barred as proceedings in regard to the assessm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n (1) of Section 25 which is also a clear indication of the intention of the legislature to give a command to the concerned assessing officers seized of the proceedings which had been initiated under sub-section(1) of Section 25 to complete within the time frame as stipulated in the said proviso. The amendment to the Kerala Finance Act, 2017 is with effect from 01.04.2017 and does not have any retrospective effect. 20. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader, contended that the amendment brought in with effect from 01.04.2017 conferred on the assessing authorities the power to reopen assessments for assessment years upto six years prior to 01.04.2017. He relies on the decision of the Apex Court in Additional Commissioner (Lega....