IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 14716 of 2008(B) --------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- K.R.VIJAYA,KALLUPATHINGAL HOUSE, VARANTHARAPILLY, THRISUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(AUDIT ASSESSMENT), COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES ,IRINJALAKUDA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C. K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 14716 OF 2008 B -------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd May, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P7. It is an order passed by the Appellate Authority staying collection of tax till the disposal of the Appeal, provided the petitioner remits fifty per cent of the disputed tax and she furnishes sufficient security bond for the balance amount within fifteen days. According to petitioner, she is a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and filed annual returns for the assessment year 2005-2006. It is her further case that the first respondent verified the Books of Account and issued a notice under Section 24(1) of the KVAT Act, proposing to reject the returns and though there was an objection, without considering her contentions, assessment was completed. In the Appeal, on the basis of the orders passed by this Court, Ext.P6 was passed. According to the petitioner, the discretion has not been properly exercised. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, while dealing with an application for stay, the Authority has to apply its mind to all relevant aspects. In this case, it is pointed out that being Ayurvedic medicines, the products will attract tax only at four per cent. But, it is treated by the assessing authority as health product and the petitioner is not in a position to remit exorbitant demand. WPC. 14716/08 B 2 Heard the learned Government Pleader also. When an application for stay is filed, it cannot be expected that the Appellate Authority will discuss thread-bare the contentions and decide the Appeal itself. What is involved is passing of an interlocutory order. It cannot be disputed that conditions can be imposed. I do not see any reason in the facts of this case warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner then submitted that some time may be given to pay the amount. Having regard to all facts, the time for payment of the fifty per cent is enlarged by two weeks from today. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.