Who is Justice K Vinod Chandran? 

Justice K Vinod Chandran was born in Thiruvambady in rural Kozhikode. He had his education in law and graduation from Government Law College, Kozhikode.

How was the Career Journey of Justice K Vinod Chandran? 

• Justice K Vinod Chandran enrolled as a lawyer in 1990 and practiced law for 20 years before he was elevated as a judge of Kerala High Court in 2011. 
• As a lawyer he primarily practiced taxation and worked as a Special Government Pleader (Taxes) between 2007 and 2011 for the government of Kerala. 
• Owing to his contribution in handling complex cases he was appointed as the judge of Kerela High Court in 2011. 
• Later, he was appointed as the Chief Justice of Patna High Court in 2023. 
• The Supreme Court Collegium headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna recommended the name of Justice K Vinod Chandran as the judge of Supreme Court. 
• He was appointed as the judge of the Supreme Court on 13th January 2025 and took oath on 16th January 2025.

What are the Notable Judgments of Justice K Vinod Chandran? 

• The Secretary-cum- Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Government of Bihar & Anr v. M/S Gangotri Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (2024) 
  • The Patna High Court interpreted the Bihar Industrial Incentive Policy, 2006, regarding tax reimbursement for assessees importing goods into the state. 
  • The Court stated that an assessee can claim 80% reimbursement only for the Value Added Tax (VAT) paid, not for Entry Tax (ET) or Central Sales Tax (CST). 
  • The division bench, led by Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy, set aside the earlier Single Bench order allowing broader tax reimbursements. 
  • The ruling restricts incentives under the Policy, provides that VAT reimbursement alone is permissible, ensuring adherence to the Policy's intent. 
• Sri Praveen Anand v. The Asst. General Manager State Bank of India & Anr  (2024) 
  • The Patna High Court ruled that courts or tribunals referring cases to Lok Adalats cannot examine the validity or correctness of the awards issued by Lok Adalats. 
  • Referral courts or tribunals are prohibited from hearing challenges to Lok Adalat awards on grounds such as fraud or misrepresentation. 
  • The Court clarified that any challenge to a Lok Adalat award must be brought before the High Court via a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 
  • The decision emphasizes that the authority to question Lok Adalat awards lies exclusively with the High Court, not with the referring courts or tribunals.  
• M/s Raj Kumar Sao Kishori Lal Sao vs The State Of Bihar & Ors (2024)  
  • The Patna High Court upheld the tax on 'Korai,' a processed by-product, ruling it taxable as an unspecified residuary item at 8%. 
  • The ruling was based on appeals by M/s Raj Kumar Sao Kishori Lal Sao, a firm involved in processing and selling food-grains, pulses, and related by-products. 
  • The court found no evidence to classify 'Korai' as cattle feed, differentiating it from Wheat Bran, which is taxed differently. 
  • Although the Appellate Authority initially taxed 'Korai' at 4%, this decision was not contested by the State.
• M/s Nav Nirman Construction v. The Union of India & Ors (2024)  
  • The Patna High Court ruled that appellate authorities cannot dismiss appeals for non-prosecution due to the absence of the assessee or their representative. They must examine the merits and grounds of the appeal. 
  • The judgment arose from a petition challenging an appellate order that dismissed an appeal solely on the grounds of non-appearance, despite the appeal being filed on time. 
  • The Court relied on Purushottam Stores v. State of Bihar & Ors., which provide the statutory obligation under the Bihar GST Act for appellate authorities to decide appeals on merits. 
  • The Court states that sub-sections (8)–(12) of Section 107 of the Bihar GST Act, that appeals must be decided based on their merits, regardless of the appellant’s absence.