St. Josephs Hospital Trust Vs Joint Commissioner (Kerala High Court)
Summary: Kerala High Court considered a writ petition filed by St. Josephs Hospital Trust challenging Ext.P1 composite Show Cause Notice issued by the respondent for multiple financial years, namely 2020-2021 to 2024-2025. The principal challenge was that a single composite notice covering several assessment years was not legally sustainable. The petitioner relied upon the Division Bench decisions of the Kerala High Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. M/s. Lakshmi Mobiles Accessories [2025 KHC OnLine 149] and Tharayil Medicals (M/s.), Thrissur v. Deputy Commissioner, Thrissur [2025 KHC OnLine 467].
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the respondent, the High Court found merit in the petitioner’s submission. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. noted that the Division Bench had already entered a finding on the legal sustainability of composite proceedings covering multiple assessment years in the decisions relied upon by the petitioner.
Applying the principles laid down in those judgments, the High Court held that interference with Ext.P1 was required. Accordingly, the Court quashed the composite Show Cause Notice. The relief, however, did not prevent the respondent from initiating fresh proceedings. Liberty was expressly granted to issue separate notices for the relevant assessment years.
For computing limitation for such fresh proceedings, the Court directed that the period commencing from the date of Ext.P1 until the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment shall be excluded. All other contentions of the parties were left open. Thus, while the composite notice covering FYs 2020-21 to 2024-25 was set aside, the Revenue retained liberty to proceed separately for the respective years.
Cases Discussed
1. Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. M/s. Lakshmi Mobiles Accessories [2025 KHC OnLine 149] — Kerala High Court — relied upon for the principle that issuance of a composite notice for multiple assessment years is not legally sustainable.
2. Tharayil Medicals (M/s.), Thrissur v. Deputy Commissioner, Thrissur [2025 KHC OnLine 467] — Kerala High Court — relied upon on the legal sustainability of composite proceedings covering multiple assessment years.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Ext.P1 composite Show Cause Notice which was issued by the respondents for multiple financial years namely, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025. The main challenge raised against the sustainability of the same is that, issuance of a composite notice for multiple assessment years was found to be not legally sustainable as per the decision rendered by this Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. M/s. Lakshmi Mobiles Accessories [2025 KHC OnLine 149] and Tharayil Medicals (M/s.), Thrissur v. Deputy Commissioner, Thrissur [2025 KHC OnLine 467].
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I find merits in the said submission, in view of the fact that, such a finding was indeed entered into by the Division Bench of this Court in the decisions referred to above.
In such circumstances, in the light of the principles laid down by this Court in the above referred judgments, an interference is required. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, quashing Ext.P1, granting liberty to the respondent to issue separate notices for the relevant assessment years. However, the period from the date of Ext.P1 till the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation for initiating fresh proceeding. All the other contentions of the parties are left open.
