IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2009 / 15TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28098 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.ABDHUL JABBAR, A.J.TRADERS, COURT ROAD, ALATHUR-678541. BY ADV. SRI.M.UNNIKRISHNA MENON SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, 3RD CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. T.S.SALUDHEEN, SASEELA MANZIL, TATTAMANGALAM - 678102. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.28098 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P6 order issued by the 2nd respondent while disposing of an interlocutory application for stay filed along with Ext.P2 appeal. The petitioner had approached the 2nd respondent aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of assessment, wherein a total tax liability of about Rs.9,50,000/- was imposed. After considering various contentions raised by the appellant and after affording opportunity of hearing, the appellate authority had issued Ext.P6 interim order. Stay of collection of the disputed tax was granted on condition of the petitioner remitting an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. 2. Contention of the petitioner is that the appellate authority having been observed that the petitioner had established a prima facie case, was erred in imposing such a condition for granting stay. On a perusal of Ext.P6 it is noticed that the appellate authority had elaborately adverted to the contentions raised in the appeal and such contentions were considered with proper application of mind. Having been convinced that there is a prima facie case which has to be looked W.P.(C).28098/09-F 2 into in detail while disposing of the appeal, interim stay was granted with a condition for payment of a meagre sum when compared with the entire tax liability. I do not think that the impugned order suffers from any impropriety, irregularity or infirmity. There is proper application of mind and proper advertence to the contentions. The condition for stay imposed in the order is absolutely one coming within the discretion of the appellate authority and no interference of this court is warranted with respect to exercise of such discretion. Hence the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 3. The petitioner had raised a further prayer for direction to the 1st respondent to give copies of the invoices alleged to have been suppressed, which is subject matter of Ext.P1 assessment. It is for the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent with a proper request for obtaining copies of such invoices and if such request is made the 1st respondent will issue copies of the required invoices facilitating the petitioner to contest the appeal in a proper manner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further requested that the time for payment of the amount stipulated in Ext.P6 may be extended. Having considered the fact that the petitioner had challenged the order in this writ petition I am inclined to grant W.P.(C).28098/09-F 3 extension of time by three weeks from today for complying with the conditions stipulated in Ext.P6. The writ petition is disposed of as above. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb