IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 13TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 22ND BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28170 of 2010(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- EMERSON PROCESS MANAGEMENT INDIA PVT LTD, HEAD OFFICE AT "HELPHI", B WING, 601 & 602,,6TH FLOOR, CENTRAL AVENUE, HIRANANDANI BUSINESS PARK, POWAI, MUMBAI 400 076,REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR.SHARAD RANE BY ADV. SMT.K.LATHA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STRATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.695001. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECKPOST, BANGARA, MANJESHWAR 671 323. 3. THE SALE TAX OFFICER(ENQUIRY), MATTANCHERRY. 682 002. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 682 031. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.28170 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th 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 appeal before the 4th respondent as per Ext.P5. Earlier, when the transport was detained, the petitioner had approached this court. In Ext.P3 judgment, release of the goods was ordered on condition of the petitioner furnishing security bond, without sureties, to the value of amounts demanded as security. 2. In Ext.P3 judgment, this court directed the 3rd respondent therein, who is the awarder of work in question, to retain from the contract Bill, an amount equivalent to the security deposit, till adjudication by the competent authority under Section 47(5) & (6) is completed. It is submitted that pursuant to Ext.P3 judgment M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited has already retained an amount of Rs.74,13,751/- without disbursing the same to the petitioner. Limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the 4th W.P.(C).28170/10 -2- respondent Appellate Authority to consider and dispose of Ext.P5 appeal and till then not to realise the amount covered under the order of penalty. 3. Having considered the fact that M/s.BPCL, Kochi is retaining the amount of penalty and the petitioner had already furnished security bond as per the directions contained in Ext.P3 judgment, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority for an expeditious disposal of the appeal. 4. In the result, the 4th respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. Till such time orders are passed on the appeal, realisation of amounts covered under Ext.P4 order shall be kept in abeyance, provided it is ensured that M/s. BPCL is retaining custody of an amount of Rs.74,13,751/-, due for payment to the petitioner. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb