SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12578

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Nitin Jamdar, CJ, S.MANU, J
THAHASILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) – Appellant
Versus
KIRAN GUPTA – Respondent


Advocates:
SMT. RESMITHA R. CHANDRAN, SRI. K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER (SENIOR), SMT. PARVATHY

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2025.

Nitin Jamdar, C. J.

By this Appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958, the Appellants – State authorities seek to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge directing the Appellants not to treat the property of the Respondent – Original Petitioner as “bought-in-land” and to drop all further proceedings in that regard.

2. The Appellants are the Tahasildar (Revenue Recovery), Vatakara, and the District Collector, Kozhikode. The Respondent – Original Petitioner, has been doing business in sandalwood oil.

3. The Petitioner was in arrears of a substantial amount of sales tax to ₹ the tune of 35,96,755/-. for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993- 94. A demand for tax and penalty was raised. Two properties of the Petitioner were attached by Appellant No.1 and the Tahsildar, Kozhikode; one of them was 7.88 ½ acres of agricultural land. The Petitioner received a notice stating that the properties would be sold in an auction. Subsequently, a further notice was issued by the Sales Tax authorities. The Petitioner then sought relief under the amnesty scheme. The Petitioner was informed that the properties were already

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top