IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 1ST ASWINA 1930 RP.No. 965 of 2008(J) --------------------- REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------- 1. ASST.COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE-1, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (TAXES), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER: ------------------------ M/S.SRI BALAJI AGENCIES, 36/2247, SHANKOORIKKAL BUILDINGS, OPPOSITE KALOOR BUS STAND, KOCHI 682 017, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI.T.JOHN ROSS. BY SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` R.P. No. 965 OF 2008 in W.P.(C) No. 18366 OF 2008 J ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2008 O R D E R Heard learned special Government Pleader for Taxes Sri.Vinod Chandran and learned counsel for respondent. 2. By the judgment under review, this Court had quashed Ext.P7. The prayer in the writ petition was to quash Ext.P7 and also to discharge the bank guarantee furnished in compliance with Ext.P1. In Ext.P7, the Commissioner had found that the petitioner in the writ petition is not entitled for release of bank guarantee and also refund of cash made towards liability under section 5(B)A for the period from 01-02 to 04-05 as introduced in the finance bill 2001. The writ petitioner apparently challenged Ext.P7 in the context of the refusal to release bank guarantee. This Court granted the relief of discharge of the bank guarantee. It was to enable the RP.965/08 : 2 : same Ext.P7 came to be quashed. It is pointed out by the review petitioners that in Ext.P7, there is also a finding that the petitioner in the writ petition is not entitled to refund the cash made. The said aspect was not challenged in the writ petition. In such circumstances, it is complained of that the court should not quash Ext.P7 as it were and that Ext.P7 ought to have been quashed in so far as it relates to the refusal to release bank guarantee. I find merit in the review petition. Accordingly, I allow the review petition and the judgment in W.P.(C) No.18366/2008 is modified and it is ordered that Ext.P7 will stand quashed in so far as it relates to the refusal to release the bank guarantee. Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE