IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31709 of 2011(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S.SOBHA PROJECTS & TRADES (P) LTD., NO.3265, 8TH CROSS, 11TH MAIN, HAL, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-8, BANGALORE, HAVING BRANCH AT IV/303, DIVYA NIVAS, EAST KADUNGALLOORKARA, DESOM, ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR, SMT.PRIYA S.SHENOY (KOCHI), SRI.TITTO THOMAS, SRI.K.A.ANI JOSEPH. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682 002. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, MATTANCHERRY, COCHIN-682 002. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 31709 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/7/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 10/8/2011 IN RESPONSE TO EXT.P1. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/8/2011 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29/8/2011 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITIONER FILED IN EXT.P5 AND APPEAL MEMORANDUM BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 28/10/2011 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN EXT.P6 STAY PETITION. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 31709 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 29th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order passed by the 1st respondent-appellate authority in a stay petition filed by the petitioner along with an appeal against an assessment order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay 50% of the amount as a condition for stay. According to the petitioner, the appellate authority has not considered the stay petition in accordance with the principles laid down by this Court for consideration of stay applications in taxation matters. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I have gone through Ext.P7 order. I am not inclined to hold that the appellate authority has committed any error of jurisdiction in passing that order. In the above circumstances, the petitioner seeks time to pay the 50% as directed in Ext.P7. While dismissing the writ petition, I direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the 50% in two equal instalments payable on 21.12.2011 and 21.1.2012. But other conditions in Ext.P7 shall be complied with by the petitioner as directed in Ext.P7. The security as directed in Ext.P7 shall be furnished within two weeks. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge