IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 8014 of 2011(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S. SHYLA AGENCIES, GENERAL MERCHANT, NAGAROOR ROAD, KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY IT'S PARTNER MR. SHERSHAD. BY ADV. SMT.K.LATHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERLA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, (SPECIALCIRCLE), COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD NO.II, COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AT ATTINGAL-695 003. 4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM-680 105. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 8014 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order imposing penalty under section 44 (8) of the KVAT Act the petitioner had preferred statutory appeal, Ext.P9, before the 4th respondent. It is stated that the petitioner had also filed a stay petition along with Ext.P9 appeal. 2. Contention of the petitioner is that while passing Ext.P7 order the authority had failed to take note of the amendment brought in to section 44(10) of the KVAT Act as well as the dictum laid down by this court in T.B. Sajeev vs. Intelligence Officer and other (32 VST 518). 3. Grievance of the petitioner is that, without considering pendency of the appeal and stay petition recovery steps has now been initiated on the basis of Ext.P10 demand notice issued under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to restrain the recovery steps till the disposal of the appeal. 4. Having considered the fact that the appellate authority is in seizin of the matter, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing that authority to take appropriate steps. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent to consider WP(C) .8014/2011 2 and pass orders on the stay petition filed along with Ext.P9 appeal, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment . 5. While considering the question regarding granting interim relief, the appellate authority shall take specific note of the contentions of the petitioner regarding the amendments to section 44 (10) as well as the dictum laid down by this court in the decision cited above. It is also to be taken note of the contentions of the petitioner that the amount of penalty imposed is highly exorbitant and the petitioner is not in a financial position to meet such huge liability. 6. Till such time orders are passed by the 4th respondent as directed above, recovery of amounts covered under Ext.P7, which is now initiated on the basis of Ext.P10 notice, shall be kept in abeyance. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) .8014/2011 3