IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 WA.No. 1274 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.18936/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER: ------------------------- A.KALIMUTHU, NITHYAGOMATHI POWER CONTROLS, KUNISSERY, THANNERPANDAL, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR SRI.T.G.ABHILASH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (WC) COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. BY G.P. SRI. MOHAMMED RAFEEQ THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 1274 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised is whether the learned single Judge has rightly declined appellant's claim for payment of tax at compounded rate for the work awarded by the railways during 2009-2010. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. The work was awarded by the railways on 18.6.2009 and according to the appellant, besides the last year's work continued for this year, appellant has not received any other work order. Even though compounding is declined, appellant has filed only nil returns, is the case of the Government Pleader. Time for completion of the work awarded by the railways on 18.6.2009 is already over. According to the appellant, railways has extended time for execution of work for which he has no record. We notice that the only reason for declining compounding facility is delay in submission of application. If the work awarded is not executed, and appellant has not received any payment, W.A. 1274/2010 2 we feel the delay has not caused any prejudice to the revenue. Considering the facts, we feel an enquiry is required in the matter. Respondent is directed to verify with the Railways as to what happened to the work awarded to the appellant and whether any other work awarded is not accounted to the department. If appellant has not received any amount under the contract awarded by the railways, for which compounding facility is sought, we still feel that appellant should be granted compounding facility and if payment is yet to commence, there will be direction to the respondents to grant compounding facility or otherwise to decline it. However, respondents should also verify the terms of the contract with regard to reimbursement of tax so that tax reimbursed by the awarder and collected by the petitioner should be recovered by the State, whether there is compounding or not. W.A. is allowed to the extent indicated above. If there is delay in payment, respondents are free to recover interest (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (K. SURENDRA MOHAN) kk Judge. W.A. 1274/2010 3