IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2008 / 2ND SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22042 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S. HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LIMITED. ALUPURAM.P.O, KALAMASSERY (FORMERLY INDIAN ALUMINIUM CO.) REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT E.C. JOSE BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(ASSESSMENT) II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE -III, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-30. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.22042 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 24th July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by Exhibit-P3 rectified order of assessment passed by the 1st respondent in relation to the assessment year 1998-999 under the Central Sales Tax Act. Petitioner has preferred an appeal against Exhibit-P3 before the statutory authority. It is the petitioner's contention that notice of demand did not accompany Exhibit-P3. Therefore, until the time which is normally to be given as per the rules to pay the tax demanded expires, after service of notice of demand, petitioner is not liable to be treated as a defaulter. Nevertheless Exhibit-P4 notice under the Revenue Recovery Act has been issued and the same has also been challenged in this writ petition. 2. Since the petitioner has preferred an appeal against Exhibit-P3 and Exhibit-P3 is even otherwise appealable under the provisions of the CST Act, I am not W.P ( C) No.22042 of 2008 2 inclined to verify the correctness of Exhibit-P3 in these proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner is right when she submits that recovery proceedings ought not to have been initiated till a notice of demand is served and time was granted to the assessee to pay the same. In the result, after hearing counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to serve on the petitioner a notice of demand pursuant to Exhibit-P3, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Thereupon, it is open to the petitioner to move an application for stay before the appellate authority. The appellate authority shall pass orders on the application for stay, within a period of three weeks from the date on which the petitioner files such an application. Enforcement of Exhibit-P4 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.22042 of 2008 3 W.P ( C) No.22042 of 2008 4