IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 27TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26317 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.BABA STEELS, REP.BY RAJESH KHAITAN, MANAGER, MENONPARA ROAD, PARAPIRIVU, KANJIKODE PO, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASST.COMMISSIONER (ASSESSMENT),COMMERCIAL TAX SPECIAL CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. 3. INSPECTING ASST.COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.26317 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 interim order issued by the 2nd respondent appellate authority on the stay petition, filed along with an appeal against the assessment made with respect to the month of June 2008. Contention of the petitioner is that the appellate authority has not properly adverted to the contentions raised in the appeal while passing the interim order. It is further contended that even after observing that prima facie case been established, the appellate authority has insisted a condition for payment of 50% of the tax amount due, which is highly improper and erroneous, according to the petitioner. 2. On going through the impugned order, Ext.P3, I notice that the appellate authority had elaborately taken note of all the contention raised in the appeal. There is extensive discussion about the contentions as well as merits of such contentions. The appellate authority observed that the appellant could not adduce any evidence by production of Books of Accounts with respect to the relevant transactions. Even then it is observed that since a prima facie case is established a conditional stay can be granted. 3. Going by Ext.P3 order I am of the opinion that the W.P.(C).26317/09 2 order of the appellate authority can neither be categorized as a non-speaking order or as an order issued without application of mind, nor it can be said that the order is issued without advertence to the contentions in the appeal. Therefore I find no infirmity or irregularity or impropriety with the order impugned, warranting interference by this Court in any manner. The condition stipulated in the order is one coming within the discretion of the appellate authority. Therefore interference in that respect is not proper. Under such circumstances I find no merit in this writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that they have already remitted an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on 20.3.2009 against the tax due under the assessment impugned in the appeal. Hence direction was sought for to give credit to such payment and to enlarge time for payment of the balance. Having considered the facts and circumstances I am inclined to extend the period stipulated for payment in the interim order by two weeks from today. It is also directed that the assessing authority may give credit to the amount if any paid against impugned assessment while collecting the amount stipulated under the interim order. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb W.P.(C).26317/09 3