The issue involved in both these cases filed by same petitioner is similar, but for the difference in assessment years. Hence both the cases are dealt with together.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the correctness and sustainability of Ext. P4 assessment order passed by the first respondent. The specific contention raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner is engaged in the operation of metal crusher unit and has been satisfying the tax opting for the benefit of compounding.
2. According to the petitioner, there cannot be any separate assessment for M-sand, which is being produced in the unit of the petitioner as by-product, in view of the law declared by this Court as per the decision reported 2011 (4) KHC 876 [State of Kerala Vs. M/s Poabs Granites Pvt. Ltd.]. However the assessing authority W.P.(C) No. 26805 and 26806 of 2014 : 2 :
issued Ext. P1 notice seeking to finalize the assessment with reference to installation of VSI machine (Vertical Shaft Impact Machine) from the relevant date alleging that it was for exclusive production for manufacturing sand. Though the petitioners sought to explain the position by submitting a proper reply, the same was not considered, leading to impugned assessment orders.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
4. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that under similar circumstances, the Division Bench of this Court as Ext. P6 judgment in W.A. 1520 of 2013 has permitted the assessee to pursue statutory remedy enjoying the benefit of interim stay during pendency of appeal.
5. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to avail appellate remedy, if aggrieved of Ext. P5 orders. If any such appeal is filed within two weeks from the date receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the second respondent in accordance with law. Coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance till such time, in the light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench in W.A. No 1520 of 2013.
W.P.(C) No. 26805 and 26806 of 2014 : 3 :
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petitions before the first respondent for further steps.
The Writ Petitions are disposed of.
Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd