IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1160 of 2006(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S.PARAMESWARAN & CO. EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY SRI.K.K.PARAMESWARAN, MANAGING PARTNER, KOLLERITHARA HOUSE, EDAPPALLY PO ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN SMT.REEJA HARI SMT.VINITHA PRASANNAN SRI.P.ANIYAN SRI.A.S.SACHIN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SALES TAX OFFICER I (D), FIRST CIRCLE, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE ADDL.APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & SALES TAX, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY G.P. SRI.TEKCHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF PARTNERSHIP DEED DT.1.4.1993. P2: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.14.2.96 BY R2 O R4. P3: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF R2 DT.20.5.95 FOR THE YEAR 1993-94. P4: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.26.12.95 OF R3. P5: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.29.12.95 ISSUED BY R2. P6: TRUE COPY OF CHALLAN NO.7632 DT.29.1.96 FOR RS.30,000/-. P7: TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DT.16.12.1995. P8: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.28.7.2001 OF THE SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.1160 of 2006 .................................................................... Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings on the ground that the amount shown is incorrect. However, delay in payment of tax is admitted and consequently petitioner will be liable to pay interest. Even though petitioner has raised a contention that appellate order is not given effect, counter affidavit is filed stating that order in appeal for the years 1992-93 and 1993-94 are given effect. If petitioner has grievance against demand of interest, petitioner has right of revision against the same. The W.P. is accordingly closed leaving the respondents to proceed for recovery of balance amount subject to petitioner's right to file revision against demand of interest. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms