IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 669 of 2009(D) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.A.JIHAS, MANAGING PARTNER, JEWEL HOMES,TRIO CHAMBERS,KANJIKUZHY,KOTTAYAM, AGED 40,S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN,RESIDING AT JEWEL HOMES, TRIO CHAMBERS, KANJIKUZHY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. INSP.ASST.COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, KOTTAYAM. 2. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WORKS CONTRACT) KOTTAYAM. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT, KOLLAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO TAXES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 669 OF 2009 D -------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th January, 2009 JUDGMENT The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction to allow such time to prefer an appeal before the third respondent u/s.55 of the KVAT Act, 03. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction to the third respondent to consider and pass orders on the delay condonation/urgent and stay petition along with the appeal. (iii) Issue such direction to the 1st respondent to stay the collection of entire dues as per Ext.P7 and P9 till disposal of the appeal to be filed u/s.55.” 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: If the petitioner prefers Appeals against Exts.P7 and P9 before the third respondent within one week from today, WPC.669/09 D 2 accompanied by applications for condonation of delay and applications seeking interim stay, the third respondent will consider and take a decision on the applications for condonation of delay and if the delay is condoned, there will be a further direction to the third respondent to consider and take a decision on the applications for stay in accordance with law. This will be done within one month from today, as the petitioner is granted a week's time to file Appeals and also interlocutory applications. Till such time as a decision is taken, recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P12 will be kept in abeyance. Needless to say, if the petitioner does not prefer Appeals accompanied by applications for condonation of delay and also applications for stay, it is open to the respondents to proceed with the recovery steps against the petitioner in accordance with law. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge