IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2011 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 30926 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S. SURYA BUILDERS, BEHIND KSRTC, CALTEX, KANNUR, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, P. RAMACHANDRAN, ARCHANA, NEAR VALIYAVALAPPU KAVU, THAVAKKARA, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, APPEALS-II, KOZHIKODE, THE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOZHIKODE AND OTHERS, PIN-673 521. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, (WORKS CONTRACT), KANNUR, THE OFFICE OF THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, SURAG COMPLEX, PODIKUNDU P.O, KANNUR – 670 582. 3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (R.R), KANNUR-670001. R1-R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30926 of 2011(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 2.08.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT SHOWING THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE PETITIONER FIRM. P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER OF STAY PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.5.2011 ON the APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER FIRM. P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICES ISSUED UNDER THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT, KANNUR, AGAINST THE PETITIONER FIRM. P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 9.11.2011 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR SHOWING THE REMITTANCE OF THE AMOUNT AS DIRECTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EXT.P2 ORDER. P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REQUEST TO THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR DATED 9.11.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE SCL. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.30926 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Against assessment orders under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner filed appeals and moved stay petitions against recovery of the tax assessed. In the same, Ext.P2 interim order dated 12.5.2011 was passed directing the petitioner to pay 10% of the balance tax for the assessment years 2005- 2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. The petitioner did not pay the same within the time stipulated in Ext.P2 order. Therefore, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated. The petitioner has subsequently paid the 10% as directed by Ext.P2 order. The petitioner now seeks condonation of delay in paying the said amount. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “l. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the 1st respondent to revive the stay granted as per Ext.P2 order pending disposal of the appeals filed by the petitioner's firm in light of compliance of the condition to remit the 10% of the outstanding dues as evidenced by Ext.P4 W.P.(C)No.30926/11 2 payment of receipt. ll. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeals pending before the appellate authority as Appeals VATA Nos.551/2011, 552/11, 552/11, 553/11, 554/11, 555/11, 556/11, 557/11, 558/11 & 559/11 at the earliest within a time bound manner, that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. lll. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the 3rd respondent not to proceed with further steps under the Revenue Recovery Act against the petitioner firm pursuant to Ext.P3 R.R. Notices and also to direct him to keep in abeyance the sale proceedings of the petitioner's vehicles already seized and to give the interim custody of the said vehicles to the petitioner firm for proper maintenance under its custody, pending disposal of the appeals of the petitioner firm by the 1st respondent.” 2. This is opposed by the learned Government Pleader. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. I put it to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the petitioner is prepared to pay 10% more as a condition for condoning the delay in complying with Ext.P2 order. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to pay an additional 10%. In the above circumstances, I direct the respondents to condone the delay in complying with the directions in Ext.P2 order on condition that the petitioner pays an additional 10% W.P.(C)No.30926/11 3 in addition to the 10% ordered to be paid as per Ext.P2. If the petitioner pays the additional 10% as well within one month, further proceedings pursuant to the revenue recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of the additional 10% as directed above within the time stipulated, the respondents can continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. On payment of the additional 10% as directed above, the vehicles of the petitioner attached in the recovery proceedings shall be returned to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.30926/11 4 W.P.(C)No.30926/11 5