IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 37511 of 2010(L) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- POPULAR VEHICLES AND SERVICES LTD., MAMANGALAM, KOCHI - REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, FRANCIS K.PAUL. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM) SRI.K.S.HARIHARAN NAIR SRI.K.UMA MAHESWAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE III, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682 015. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM - 682 015. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.37511 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Aggrieved by Ext.P1(a) to P(1)d orders of assessments relating to the years 2000-'01 to 2003-'04, the petitioner had preferred statutory appeals before the 2nd respondent, as evidenced from Ext.P2(a) to P2(d). It is also submitted that with respect to payment of liability arising out of Ext.P1 series orders, the petitioner had already approached the assessing authority seeking benefits under the 'Amnesty Scheme 2008-'09'. Ext.P4 is the application submitted in this regard. Learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner was already issued with intimation for payment of amounts under the Amnesty Scheme. Apprehension of the petitioner is that, if the petitioner settles payment of the amount under Amnesty Scheme and if appeals are allowed subsequently, they will deprive the petitioner to enjoy the benefits if any granted by the appellate authority. W.P.(C).37511/10-L -2- 2. The above said apprehension has no basis since the provisions in the Amnesty Scheme itself enables payment of the amounts subject to result of any statutory appeals. Therefore it is evident that if ultimately the petitioner is getting any relief from the appellate authority, that benefit will be passed on to the petitioner, despite settlement of payment under the Amnesty Scheme. 3. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 series appeals as early as possible, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. It is made clear that payment of amounts, if any made on the basis of Amnesty Scheme will be subject to result of the final outcome in the appeals now pending disposal before the 2nd respondent. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb