Page 50 - GSTL_20th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 3

264 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 39
made in writ petition with regard to that - Principles of natural justice being
followed, no ground for interference made out - Impugned order appealable
under Section 55 of erstwhile Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Article 226
of Constitution of India. [paras 5, 6]
Petition dismissed
REPRESENTED BY : S/Shri Bobby John and S. Ajayghosh Kumar,
Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Dr. Thushara James, GP, for the Respondent.
[Judgment]. - Through the instant writ petition a challenge has been laid
to the assessment order dated 2-3-2020 pertaining to the assessment year 2013-14
Ext. P5 of the State Goods & Services Tax Department i.e., proceedings of the As-
sistant Commissioner, Assessment Special Circle, Kollam, inter alia on the facts
that no opportunity of hearing was granted, except permission to file reply even
the rate of tax as per Section 6(1) of the KVAT has not been charged properly. In
other words concessional rate of 0.5% of the sale of the used motor vehicles has
not been looked into but tax at the rate of 14.5% has been charged.
2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that
the reply was filed on 28-2-2020, the assessment order was passed on the next
working day i.e., 2-3-2020 without granting such opportunity and it is not only
arbitrary but with pre-determined. When the order is without jurisdiction, ag-
grieved party cannot be relegated to remedy of appeal as the jurisdiction of writ
Court under Article 226 of the Constitutional of India, warranting judicial inter-
ference or judicial view can always be invoked.
3. Dr. Thushara James controverted the submission of Learned Counsel
on the ground that not only the reply but even personal hearing was also afford-
ed which reflected from the impugned order. It is a clever device to overcome the
period of limitation in case of any interference as assessment year, in the instant
case is 2013-14, and there may not be possible idea for taking any objection.
4. I have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and appraised the pa-
per books and am of the view that there is no force or merit.
5. Discretion by warranting interference under Article 226 of the Con-
stitution of India can be always exercised in case, on perusal of the impugned
order, prima facie, it is established to be without jurisdiction or non-adherence to
the principles of natural justice. But the argument of Counsel representing the
petitioner is apparently not tenable on plain perusal of the impugned order as
not only the reply was ordered to be given on 28-2-2020 even the Assistant Man-
ager of the petitioner also appeared and he argued the matter as noticed in the
impugned order. There is no such assertion in the writ petition with regard to
that. The aforementioned order is appealable under Section 55 of the erstwhile
KVAT Act, 2003.
6. No ground for interference is made out. The petitioner if so advised
is at liberty to avail the remedy of appeal. With the aforementioned observations
this writ petition is dismissed.

_______

GST LAW TIMES  20th August 2020  50