IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2008 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17748 of 2008(K) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ M/S. VIJAY TECHS PRIVATE LTD, HOLY ANGELS BUILDING, SOUTH KALAMASSERY, KOCHI-04, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. BABY JOSEPH. BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN SRI.K.M.ANEESH RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (AUDIT ASSESSMENT), COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 17748 OF 2008 K -------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Ext.P7 is challenged in this Writ Petition. Ext.P7 is a composite order passed on the Appeals filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer for the assessment year 2006 - 2007. The Appellate Authority has granted stay on condition that the petitioner remits forty per cent of the balance amounts due in both the Appeals. According to petitioner, petitioner is a Company engaged in the business of undertaking works contract in civil construction work. It entered into a contract with a Company by name M/s. Vision Projects & Ventures for undertaking a works contract with regard to an apartment complex. It is stated that the petitioner completed the work and handed over the project to the awarder. According to the petitioner, the awarder is liable to remit the entire statutory levies and taxes as per the terms of the contract. Petitioner has conceded a return with two per cent tax under WPC. 17748/08 K 2 Section 8(a) (i) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. By Ext.P1 order, petitioner was assessed to tax at Rs.1,65,384/= and interest at Rs.22,196/=. A penalty in a sum of Rs.9,90,908/= is also imposed under Section 67 of the Act vide Ext.P2. It is against these orders that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 Appeal and Ext.P4 Revision accompanied Exts.P5 and P6 applications for stay in which Ext.P7 conditional stay was passed by the first respondent. According to petitioner, this is a case where Ext.P7 order, at any rate, imposing payment of forty per cent of the penalty amounts is unreasonable. It is also stated that the petitioner is going through extremely difficult circumstances and it has produced Ext.P8 Balance Sheet. It is pointed out that by Shri Devan Ramachandran, learned counsel for the petitioner, that even assuming everything against the petitioner, what can be taxed is only double the amount in Ext.P1 and it will come to nearly Rs.3,60,000/= and, therefore, having regard to all the facts and circumstances, the levy of penalty may be interfered with totally. WPC. 17748/08 K 3 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader also. Having considered the circumstances, I feel that interest of justice would be met, if Ext.P7 is modified. Accordingly, Ext.P7 is modified and while retaining the direction for payment of forty per cent of the amount demanded in Ext.P1, as regards Ext.P2, it is ordered that the petitioner need pay only twenty per cent of the amount demanded in Ext.P2 and furnish security for the balance. This will be done within three weeks from today. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy// PS to Judge