IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21474 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.GANESHAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMA PODUVAL, SHREE GANESH TIMBER AND TILES, ANNUR P.O., PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.M.M.ANTO RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECERETARY TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER -IV, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KANNUR. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) 21474 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 9th July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenging Ext. P1 order of assessment imposing penalty upon the petitioner under Section 67 of the KVAT Act, the petitioner has preferred statutory appeal before the first appellat authority along with a petition for stay, which led to Ext.P2 order whereby the petitioner has been directed to remit 25% of the disputed amount and furnish security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the assessing authority as specified. The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the stand taken by the second respondent, whereby the petitioner has been insisted to produce Bank Guarantee for the balance amount referring to the observation in Ext.P2 order that the security shall be to the satisfaction of the assessing authority. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. It is very much evident that the statute contemplates W.P.(C) 21474 OF 2010 2 security shall be satisfied as provided under Rule 19(2) read with Rule 85 of the KVAT Rules. In the above circumstances, this Court finds that the petitioner is at liberty to furnish security in conformity with the statutory requirement and on satisfaction of the same, it shall be accepted by the respondents to enable the petitioner to avail the benefit of the interim stay granted by the appellate authority. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk