IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22022 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.O.JOSE, PROPRIETOR, J.J.ENTERPRISES, ELAMAKKARA, KOCHI-682 026. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR SRI.V.DEVANANDA NARASIMHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT CIRCLE-1, KALAMASSERY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER(APPEALS), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES, IRINJALAKUDA. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 22022 of 2010 C ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The goods transported by the petitioner were intercepted on the way, doubting evasion of tax and demanding security deposit, leading to issuance of notice under Section 47(2) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. Subsequently, on finalisation of the adjudication proceedings, the amount satisfied by the petitioner by way of security deposit was converted as penalty as per Ext.P1 order, which has been challenged by filing Ext.P2 appeal before the second respondent. In the meanwhile, the assessment was also finalised by the first respondent as per Ext.P3 order dated 24-02-2010, which is under challenge in Ext.P4 appeal filed before the second respondent, along with Ext.P5 petition for stay. The grievance of the petitioner is that, with any regard to the pendancy of the above proceedings, Ext.P6 Revenue Recovery notice has been issued by the third respondent, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3. Considering the fact that the penalty involved has WPC.22022/2010 : 2 : already been satisfied by the petitioner, when the security deposit has been converted as penalty vide Ext.P1, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider and finalise Ext.P2 appeal in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. The second respondent is also directed to consider and pass final orders on Ext.P5 petition for stay in accordance with law at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one month' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such orders are passed on Ext.P5, all further steps pursuant to Ext.P6 shall be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) aks