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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 17196

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.M.MANOJ, J
GILLETTE INDIA LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
ASST. COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) SPL CIRCLE-I, KOCHI-682 018 – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 24629 OF 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T.R.MANOJ
For the Respondents: SRI.ALAN P DEV

Assessment proceedings must initiate within five years as per Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

Headnote:The case revolves around the provisions of Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, which stipulates that assessment proceedings for escaped turnover must be initiated within five years. The petitioner contended that the proceedings against them were initiated beyond this five-year period, thus rendering them barred by limitation. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, aligning with precedent set in The Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) v. M/s. Cholayil Pvt. Ltd. The final result stated that the writ petition is allowed.

Table of Content
1. challenging assessment order under the kerala value added tax act. (Para 1)
2. limitation period for assessment proceedings discussed. (Para 2)

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of March, 2026 The writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P2 assessment order passed by the 1st respondent under Section 25 (1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short “the Act”).

2. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, in terms of Section 25 (1) of the Act, proceedings thereunder must be initiated within five years from the last date of the year to which the return relates. The assessment year in question is 2006-2007, therefore, proceedings for assessment of escaped turnover ought to have been initiated on or before 31.03.2013. However, the proceedings were initiated only on 20.12.2013, as evidenced by the pre- assessment notice referred to in Ext.P2 assessment order. Consequently, the assessment proceedings are barred by limitation.

Under such circumstances, it appears that the proceedings are against the statutory provisions of Section 25 (1) of the Act. The said issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of The Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) v. M/s. Cholayil Pvt. Ltd., [(2022) 14 SCC 779], which is squarely applicable to the present case. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

Sd/-

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 Back to top