IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2011 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 34070 of 2011(G) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------------- P.G.SURENDRAN NAIR, PROPRIETOR, POPULAR INDUSTRIES, VADUTHALA, KOCHI-23. BY ADVS. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR, SRI.JAIRAM.V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.IV, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-13. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM-13. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. 4. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-30. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.34070/2011 G APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CLARIFICATION DATED 21/4/2008 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PENALTY ORDER DATED 30/9/2009 PASSSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 27/4/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RR NOTICE DATED 7/7/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18/7/2011 IN WPC.19352/2011. EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4/11/2011 PASSSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.34070 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order passed by the appellate authority under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act in a stay petition filed by the petitioner along with the appeal filed against the assessment order for the year 2005-06, whereby as a condition for stay the petitioner has been directed to pay 40% of the demand. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has a very good prima facie case and therefore the appellate authority ought to have granted a full stay instead of directing payment of 40% as a condition for stay. 2. This is opposed by the learned Government Pleader. 3. I have gone through Ext.P6 order. Unusually, in that order which runs into 7 pages the appellate authority has considered every contention on prima facie merit. As such, the petitioner cannot complain that the principles laid W.P.(C)No.34070 of 2011 -2- down by this Court in the matter of considering such stay applications have not been followed in passing that order. When this was pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he confines prayer for instalment facility to pay off the 40% as per Ext.P6 order. Taking a lenient view, I direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the 40% as per Ext.P6 order in three equal monthly instalments on 16.01.2012, 16.02.2012 & 16.03.2012. The other conditions in Ext.P6 shall be promptly complied with. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/