IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2010 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 11843 of 2010(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S. GASHA STEELS PVT. LTD., NIDA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SMT. P.T.AYSHA. BY ADV. SRI.K.SRIKUMAR SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SPECIAL CIRCLE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. 3. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDL. BENCH, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.CV.K.SHAMSUDEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.11843 of 2010-E ---------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court, being aggrieved of Ext.P3 order issued under Section 35 of the KGST Act, which however has been sought to be intercepted by filing the statutory appeals as borne by Exts.P4 and P5, along with Exts.P6 and P7 petitions for stay, which are pending consideration before the third respondent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only reason for passing Ext.P3 order, is the imposition of penalty upon the petitioner, whereas the question of penalty has not become final by virtue of the fact that the impugned orders imposing penalty upon the petitioner in respect of the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 have already been subjected to challenge by filing necessary appeals with reference to the dictum laid down in State of Punjab and others V. Bhatinda District Co- operative Milk P. Union Ltd. (2007) 10 VST 180) and the said appeals have already been directed to be considered and disposed of, as per the direction given by this Court vide judgment dated 26.3.2010 in W.P(C) No.10324 of 2010. The learned counsel further W.P(C) No.11843 of 2010-E 2 submits that there is every chance for allowing the appeals preferred against the penalty; upon which Ext.P3 order cannot have further existence and as such, seeks to issue appropriate direction to the third respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P4 and P5 appeals. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Considering the sequence of events, the third respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P4 and P5 appeals in accordance with law and also with reference to the order to be passed in the appeals already preferred by the petitioner against the penalty which are directed to be finalised as per the judgment dated 26.3.2010 in W.P(C) No.10324 of 2010; as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that till appropriate orders are passed on Exts.P4 and P5 appeals, all further coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// ab P.A to Judge