WP(C) 2282/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P K MUSAHARY Heard Dr.A.K.Saraf, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms M L Gope, learned coun sel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Debey, learned standing counsel Finan ce (Taxation) Department. The demand notice/order No.687 dated 6.10.2010 issued by the Certificat e Officer (Taxation) Kamrup, Guwahati is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. By the impugned notice/order the petitioner/firm has been directed to pay an amo unt of Rs.1(one) crore per month towards realization of recovery of default amou nt for the bakijai case No. 52/2010-11/AET for Rs.1,75,04,233.00 under the AET A ct, 1953 and Bakijai case No.81 of 2009 10/AVAT & CST for Rs.4,52,67,839.00, ou t of which, petitioner has paid Rs.1,27,31,600.00. Earlier to passing of the imp ugned order the petitioner filed a representation dated 30.9.2010 before the res pondent No.3, the Certificate Officer (Taxation), Kamrup, Guwahati and in reply to the same the aforesaid impugned order has been passed. Petitioner submits tha t there is no malafide intention on the part of the petitioner/firm to avoid pay ment of tax, rather it sincerely wants to pay the entire amount by way of payme nt in installments and for that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.5 lacs per mon th. Mr. Dueby,learned counsel submits that the department would like to have at leas t 10% of the total arrear amount per month as installments which come to around Rs.35 lacs per month. I have given serious consideration on the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties. In my considered view the interest of the petitioner firm in r unning the business and also the revenue interest of the State by way of realizi ng the tax is to be balanced. The said balance could be maintained if the petiti oner is directed to pay at least Rs.20 lacs as monthly installment towards the t otal arrear amount within 15 days of every calendar month. It is ordered accordi ngly. However, it is made clear that in case there is default in payment of the installment as directed, the respondents department will be at liberty to take a ction against the petitioner firm as per existing rules and procedure. The amoun t demand/notice dated 6.10.2010 shall remain suspended subject to payment of mon thly installments as fixed by this court. Petition stands disposed of.