IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 17TH MAGHA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 10 of 2009 ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/05/2008 IN TA:129/2007 of S.T.A.T.ADDL.BENCH ,KOZHIKODE .................... REVN.PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE : ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY JOINT COMMISSIONER(LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI V.K. SHAMSUDEEN RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE : ----------------------------------------- M/S.ATHANI BRICKS AND METALS LTD., PADINJARATHARA. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- S.T.Rev. No. 10 OF 2009 and C.M. Appl. 45 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. The belated revision is filed against the cancellation of penalty under Entry Tax Act. A Division Bench of this Court has declared the Charging Provision of the Entry Tax Act as unconstitutional. In fact, the Tribunal has followed the Division Bench judgment and dismissed the State appeal. This Revision Petition is filed by the State with a delay of 53 days. Even though we are satisfied that the grounds raised are genuine to condone the delay and we condone the delay, we do not think that notice should be issued to the respondent in the Revision Petition, because the matter can be left open for re-consideration by the officer if the appeal filed in the Supreme Court is allowed. We, therefore, allow the delay condonation petition. However, we dismiss the Revision petition leaving freedom to the State to move the Tribunal for rectification of the order, if Supreme Court allows the appeal filed by State. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (K. SURENDRA MOHAN) Judge. ttb