IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 26TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28870 of 2010(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- MECH-AIR INDUSTRIES, 3/16, GORWA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, GORWA, VADODARA - 390 016. GUJARAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR & AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI.MUKESH K.SHAH. BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALIDHARAN (AROOR). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SALES TAX OFFICER (ENQUIRY) COMMERCIAL TAXES, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI-02. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-15. 3. KITCO LTD., PB NO.1820, RAVIPURAM, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-16. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V.K. SAMSUDHEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.28870 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Aggrieved by Ext.P4 order imposing penalty under Section 47(6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act) the petitioner had filed statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P6. Along with the appeal, the petitioner had also filed applications seeking stay and early hearing of the appeal, as per Exts.P7 & P8. 2. The issue pertains to detention effected with respect to a transport of machinery sent from the factory of the petitioner at Gujrat to the Spices Board, at its work site at Vandanmedu. When the transport was intercepted and notice under Section 47(2) was issued, the petitioner had approached this court. In Ext.P1 judgment, this court directed release of the goods on condition of the petitioner furnishing security W.P.(C).28870/10-G -2- bond and also on producing an undertaking obtained from the KITCO Ltd., who was executing the work on behalf of the Spices Board, to the effect that payments due to the petitioner with respect to the work in question to the extent of the security deposit demanded will not be disbursed, till finalisation of the adjudication proceedings under Section 47. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an amount equivalent to the penalty imposed, is still kept detained by M/s.KITCO Ltd. (Third respondent herein). Under such circumstances, contention of the petitioner is that, the amount of penalty imposed remains well secured. Therefore a direction was sought for to the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal on an early basis and to restrain the 1st respondent from realising the amount from the 3rd respondent, till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Having considered the fact that the amount of penalty is secured through undertaking furnished by the 3rd W.P.(C).28870/10-G -3- respondent, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the appeal on an early basis. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6 appeal, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 6. Till such time orders are passed on Ext.P6 appeal, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P4 shall be kept in abeyance, provided the 3rd respondent shall not release the amount detained as per directions contained in Ext.P1 judgment till the disposal of the appeal. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb