IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2008 / 17TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23733 of 2008(A) --------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ ASOK NAIR, PROPRIETOR, M/S.LAKSHMI PLUMBERLINE PRODUCTS, KULAPPULLY, SHORANUR-2,PALAKKAD DISTRICT BY ADV. DR.K.B.MUHAMED KUTTY (SR.) SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, OTTAPPALAM. 2. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD 3. THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE, THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER 4. THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT SECRETARY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 23733 OF 2008 A -------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th August, 2008 JUDGMENT Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is a registered dealer dealing in PVC fittings. According to petitioner, he is entitled to exemption for the assessment year 2002 - 2003 which was partly granted. There was a disallowance which was challenged in Appeal and that was confirmed by the State Level Committee on the ground that the land is not fully owned by the petitioner. Against this, he has filed W.P.(C). No.13061/08 which is pending. In respect of another claim, the State Level Committee directed the third respondent, District Level Committee, to give the petitioner another chance to produce cash receipts or payment proof in support of his claim in respect of plant and machinery and electrification. Ext.P3 is the revised assessment for the year 2002 - 2003. Ext.P4 is a recovery notice. Petitioner preferred WPC. 23733/08 A 2 Ext.P5 Appeal and Ext.P6 stay petition. Petitioner addressed the third respondent to implement the decision of the State Level Committee. Ext.P7 series are petitions. I heard the learned Government Pleader also. I feel that a decision should be taken on Ext.P6 stay petition and at the same time, a decision should be taken by the third respondent on the basis of the direction by the State Level Committee in respect of which the petitioner has filed Ext.P7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: There will be a direction to the third respondent to take a decision on Ext.P7 in accordance with law within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. There will be a direction also to the fourth respondent Appellate Tribunal to consider and take a decision on Ext.P6 stay petition in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Till such time as a WPC. 23733/08 A 3 decision is taken on Ext.P6, recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P4 will be kept in abeyance. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True copy// PS to Judge