High Court Judgment: Writ Petition Challenging Revenue Recovery Notices

Case Name:

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 21145 of 2023 - N.K Jeeju and N.K Shaiju vs. Deputy Commissioner State Goods & Service Tax Department and Others

Key Takeaways:

1. The petitioners challenged revenue recovery notices related to arrears of Value Added Tax (VAT).
2. The Court directed the petitioners to obtain a certified copy of the assessment order and file an appeal within ten days.
3. Coercive measures against the petitioners were restrained for a period of one month.

Case Synopsis:

The provided appears to be a judgment from the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, dated November 3, 2023, regarding a writ petition (Civil) No. 21145 of 2023. The judgment was delivered by the Honorable Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh.

The petitioners in this case are N.K Jeeju and N.K Shaiju, who have filed a writ petition impugning revenue recovery notices in respect of arrears of Value Added Tax (VAT). The respondents include the Deputy Commissioner State Goods & Service Tax Department, the Tahsildar (RR), the Village Officer Palayad, and M/S. Sreekrishna International, represented by its managing partner Baiju N.K.

The judgment states that the arrears of tax are in respect of the financial years 2012-13 to 2018-19, and the firm Sree Krishna International was incorporated by the partnership deed dated 28.07.2001. The petitioners claimed that they retired from the firm with effect from 31.03.2009 and that they never received any notice nor the assessment order after their retirement.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not liable to pay the amount mentioned in the notices as they were not the partners of the firm Sree Krishna International and no liability can be passed upon them after they retired from the partnership firm. The petitioners prayed for quashing of the revenue recovery notices.

A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the State, stating that as per Rule 5(8)(b) (of Income Tax Rules, 1962) of KGST Rules 1963, if a partner retires without the partnership being dissolved, they should send a declaration in Form 3 within 30 days of their retirement, along with a copy of the deed of retirement. It was stated that the petitioners had not intimated or filed any declaration in Form 3 that they had retired from the partnership firm of Sree Krishna International. It was further stated that under the KGST Act and Rules, the petitioners are still the partners of Sree Krishna International.

The judgment considered the fact that the question of whether the partners had retired from the partnership firm or they were still the partners for which the assessment order had been completed with the revenue recovery notices issued. The Court decided not to dwell upon the disputed question of fact and disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioners to approach the assessing authority within ten days for obtaining the certified copy of the assessment order and file an appeal before the appellate authority in accordance with the provisions of law. It was also directed that for a period of one month, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned notices.

This judgment essentially directs the petitioners to follow the legal process for appealing the assessment order and obtaining a certified copy of the assessment order. It also provides a temporary relief by restraining coercive measures for a period of one month.

FAQ:

Q1: What was the petition about?

A1: The petition challenged revenue recovery notices in respect of arrears of Value Added Tax (VAT).

Q2: What was the Court’s direction to the petitioners?

A2: The Court directed the petitioners to approach the assessing authority for obtaining a certified copy of the assessment order and file an appeal within ten days.

Q3: Was there any relief provided to the petitioners?

A3: Yes, the Court restrained coercive measures against the petitioners for a period of one month.