IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 22ND MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4578 of 2010(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- AJAYAKUMAR P., S/O.KANDANKUTTY SEA QUEEN HOTEL, BEACH ROAD, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS SRI.T.M.SUNIL SMT.S.CHITHRA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX (APPEALS), CALICUT. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 1ST CIRCLE, CALICUT. 3. INTELIGENCE OFFICER, INTELLIGENCE SQUAD NO.1, COMMERCIAL TAXES, CALICUT. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 4578 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is mainly aggrieved of the non-finalization of Ext.P4 appeal filed along with the I.A.s dated 23.12.2008, stated as pending before the first respondent. The petitioner also seeks for a direction to be issued to the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 Option and the accompanying petition dated 01.02.2010. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that orders imposing the penalty and the consequential demand notices do not have any legal or factual basis, especially in view of the fact that the petitioner had already opted to remit the tax at the 'compounded rate' and was effecting payment at the rate of '140%' of the tax, which is a vested right as provided under the statute, instead of suffering detailed assessment as contemplated otherwise. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the case put forth by the petitioner in the Writ Petition is fully correct, in view of the fact that Ext.P2 Option and the petition are dated only on 01.02.2010. In any view of the matter, this Court does not propose to go into the merits of the rival contentions, but WP(C) No.4578/2010 2 for giving appropriate directions to have the matter finalized in accordance with law. 4. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 appeal in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Similarly, the second respondent is directed to consider Ext.P2 Option and the accompanying petition and pass appropriate orders thereon within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that till finalization of the proceedings as above, all further coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that all the contentions raised by the petitioner in the Writ Petition are left open. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc