IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 6TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 25605 of 2011(A) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- M/S.WIPRO LTD., 2ND & 3RD FLOOR, PANORAMA HOUSE, KOCHI-682 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER - OPERATIONS, MS.USHA PRADEEP KUMAR. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TERRY V.JAMES SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, SPECIAL CIRCLE III, COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, PERUMANOOR, KOCHI-682 015. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OF SALES TAX, COMMERCIAL TAX COMPLEX, PERUMANOOR, KOCHI-682 015. 3. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 030. BY SRI. SOJAN JAMES, SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.25605/2011 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 27-1-2005 0F SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL.BENCH, ERNAKULAM IN T.A.NOS.1038, 1039 & 1040/03 FOR ASST. YEARS 1997-98 & 1998-99. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 23-1-2009 OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS),ERNAKULAM IN S.T.A.NOS.3231/07, 3233/07 & 3232/07 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1990-00 & 2000-01. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24-3-2011 OF THE IST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28-3-2011 OF THE IST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 20-3-2011 OF THE IST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98. EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF REVISED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23-3-2011 OF THE IST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE DATED 28-2-2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 11-4-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98. EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 11-4-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 11-4-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98. EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 11-4-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. WP(C).No.25605/2011 EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF RECTIFICATION PETITION DATED 9-4-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-00. EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 6-5-2011 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C)NO.13006/2011. EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF COMMON ORDER DATED 18-8-2011 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN APPEAL STA.NOS.223 & 224/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.25605 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011 J U D G M E N T This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by Exhibit P14 order passed by the 2nd respondent. 2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Exhibit P14 is the interim order passed in an application filed in STA Nos.223/11 and 224/11. The appeals filed by the petitioner is against the orders of the assessing authority for the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99. Presently, the petitioner is directed to remit 25% of the total demand and to furnish adequate security for the balance amount. 3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in respect of earlier years, the 1st respondent has accepted only 10% of the Annual Maintenance Receipts as taxable turnover in the light of the common order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. Therefore it is pointed out that the 2nd respondent ought to have granted stay of recovery of the entire W.P.(C)No.25605/11 -2- amount. It is also submitted that certain amounts paid already have not been given credit by the 1st respondent. 4. The learned Government Pleader while supporting the order passed by the 2nd respondent submitted that even after Exhibit P1 order, the petitioner could not submit all the documents and the absence of the same has resulted in the assessment order. Hence it is submitted that the conditions imposed are perfectly justified. 5. Having regard to the points raised in the Writ Petition, I am of the view that the direction to deposit 25% of the total demand can be modified. The contention of the learned Government Pleader is that at any rate 10% of the amount will be taxable. 6. In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the petitioner to deposit an amount Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) each in the appeals totalling Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) within a period of two weeks towards the tax liability for the different years and on deposit of the same, it will be treated as sufficient for the purpose of hearing of the appeals. On such deposit, the recovery proceedings will be kept in W.P.(C)No.25605/11 -3- abeyance till the disposal of the appeal. The appeals will be disposed of within a period of two months. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn