IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7430 of 2010(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.KENTON LEISURE SERVICES(P) LTD., ATTINKUZHY, KAZHAKUTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695582 REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, MR.T.N.SREEKUMAR MENON. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE LUXURY TAX OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 8 /3 /2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 7430 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is that challenging assessment of 'luxury tax' demanding penalty, the petitioner has filed appeal along with a petition for stay. However, when the respondents chose to pursue recovery proceedings without any regard to the pendency of the said proceedings in the appeal, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.34739/2009 which was disposed of as per Ext.P1 judgment, directing the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P19 to P27 petitions for stay, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as specified therein and to keep the recovery proceedings in abeyance till such time. The second respondent was also directed to issue necessary orders withdrawing prohibition imposed on the operation of the Bank account of the petitioner as per Ext.P28, insisting a condition to the Bank to maintain the balance outstanding in the account as on that day while permitting future transactions. 2. Coming to the case in hand, the learned counsel for the WPC No.7430/2010 -2- petitioner submits that absolutely no order has been passed or communicated to the petitioner till date, despite the fact that final hearing of the appeal is already over, pursuant to Ext.P2 notice dated 23/12/2009. The petitioner has now come to understand that the appellate authority/the third respondent has finalised the appeal, rejecting the same and it is pursuant to this, that Ext.P3 order has been issued by way of 'garnishee proceedings'. As a result of this, it is submitted by the learned Counsel that, huge amounts have been appropriated from the bank account of the petitioner and operations of the bank account of the petitioner have been made to a standstill, which hence is sought to be intercepted in this Writ Petition. The learned Counsel also submits that the respondents are liable to be compelled to serve a copy of the order, stated as passed in the concerned appeal, so as to enable the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy, without which there is no justification for proceeding with coercive steps. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the second respondent/third respondent is directed to serve a copy of the WPC No.7430/2010 -3- order stated as passed in the appeal forming the subject matter of Ext.P2 notice within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner is at liberty to pursue further steps by availing the statutory remedy, approaching the appropriate authorities in this regard, if aggrieved of the said order passed by the appellate authority. 5. However, so as to enable the petitioner to pursue such exercise, the first respondent/concerned authority is directed to issue necessary orders to the bankers of the petitioner as mentioned in Ext.P3 that all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance for a further period of six weeks. It is also made clear that appropriation of amount, if any, pursuant to Ext.P3 will be subject to the result of the appeal to be filed by the petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE dpk