IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 27288 of 2011(I) ------------------------ PETITIONER : -------------------- M/S.SUPER STONE DIAMONDS, TC X/974/29, 2ND FLOOR, BHIMA BUILDING, SOUTH BAZAR, THRISSUR- 680001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI.K.V.JOHNY. BY ADV. SRI.TOMSON T. EMMANUEL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ASSMNT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, SPECIAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR-683572. 2. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THRISSUR-683572. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-682015. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 27288 of 2011(I) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF ORDER NO. ITD 59/08-09 DATED 02-03-2009 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER SQUAD NO. I, THRISSUR. EXT.P2 : COPY OF RECEIPT NO. 199725 DATED 20-04-2009, AMOUNT TO RS. 1,01,000/- ISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO. I, THRISSUR. EXT.P2(a) : COPY OF RECEIPT NO. 170613 DATED 27-05-2009, AMOUNT TO RS. 1,02,000/- ISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO. I, THRISSUR. EXT.P2(b) : COPY OF RECEIPT NO. 170815 DATED 29-06-2009, AMOUNT TO RS. 1,03,000/- ISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO. I, THRISSUR. EXT.P2(c) : COPY OF RECEIPT NO. 170842 DATED 29-07-2009, AMOUNT TO RS. 1,36,026/- ISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO. I, THRISSUR. EXT.P3 : COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24.03.2010 COMPLETED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2007-08 UNDER THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF REQUEST DATED 04.11.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER U/S. 66 OF THE SAID ACT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKE. EXT.P5 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 27.06.2011 IN WP(C) NO. 16775 OF 2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P6 : COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 02.09.2011 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT, ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER, AGAINST EXT.P4 APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE. EXT.P7 COPY OF APPEAL FOR 2007-08 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST EXT.P3 AND P6. (Contd...) WP(C).No. 27288 of 2011(I) EXT.P8 COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, FILED BY THE PETITIONER, BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT.P7, FOR THE REASON OF DELAY IN DISPOSING EXT.P4. EXT.P9 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH EXT.P7. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.27288 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by non-consideration of his Ext.P9 application for stay filed along with Ext.P7 appeal against Ext.P3 assessment order. The petitioner seeks expeditious disposal of the stay petition. 2. The learned Government Pleader points out that the appeal has been filed with 355 days of delay and a petition to condone delay also. Therefore, according to the learned Government Pleader, this Court should not exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. 3. To explain the delay, the petitioner points out that Ext.P3 assessment order was served on the petitioner on 4.9.2010, against which the petitioner filed Ext.P4 application for rectification on 4.11.2010, which was disposed of by Ext.P6 order only on 2.9.2011 and that is why the delay has been caused in filing the appeal. W.P.(C)No.27288/11 2 4. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The 3rd respondent shall consider Ext.P8 application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal along with Ext.P9 stay application, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the 3rd respondent is inclined to condone delay in filing the appeal, the 3rd respondent shall pass orders on the stay petition also simultaneously. Till orders are thus passed, further coercive proceedings for recovery of the tax disputed in the appeal shall be kept in abeyance on condition that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs.1.5 lakhs within two weeks from today. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.27288/11 3 W.P.(C)No.27288/11 4