IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23892 of 2008(T) --------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ M/S. S.S. CHEMICALS, V/708-A, DEVELOPMENT AREA, EDAYAR, MUPPATHADOM.P.O, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGER K. NATARAJAN. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, MEMBER SECRETARY, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE, PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 23892 OF 2008 T -------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd August, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P12 series which are demand notices. According to petitioner, the demand of taxes is not tenable because it is covered by Ext.P1 exemption order. Petitioner had approached this Court earlier, resulting in Ext.P8 Judgment. Therein, this Court had directed that if the petitioner paid Rs.5 Lakhs and furnished security for the balance amount due under Ext.P10 therein, the recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance for a period of two months or till the date of disposal of the Appeal whichever is earlier. Petitioner sought information regarding the Appeal as evident from Ext.P11. Ext.P11 further shows that the matter has not been placed before the State Level Committee on sales tax exemption, as the expert opinion has not yet been received from IIT, Chennai. In the WPC.23892/08 T 2 meantime, Ext.P12 series are issued which, according to petitioner, are again covered by Ext.P1 exemption order. Learned Government Pleader submits that the Appeal has not yet been placed before the State Level Committee and it has not been taken up and also submits that the amounts are covered by Exts. P7 & P8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already paid Rs.5 Lakhs and given security for the balance amount. As the Appeal has not been disposed of, I feel that Ext.P12 should be kept in abeyance till the Appeal is disposed of. In such circumstances, there will be a direction to the first respondent to place the Appeal before the State Level Committee within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment and the State Level Committee will proceed to decide the Appeal in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date on which the Appeal is placed before the State Level Committee. Till such WPC.23892/08 T 3 time as a decision is taken on the Appeal, recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P12 series will be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy// PS to Judge