IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2009 / 22ND ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1409 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.32101/2007 Dated 23/01/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ M/S.SEALAB, DIVISION OF SEA FOOD PARK INDIA LTD., XIII/99A, KELTRON ROAD, AROOR, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY V.RAJAGOPAL, DIRECTOR - TECHNICAL. BY ADV. SRI.ARIKKAT VIJAYAN MENON SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR, COMMERCIAL TAX CHECK POST, WALAYAR. 2. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KUTHIATHODE. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY G.P. SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ON 13/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.1409 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 13th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The challenge against the validity of Section 46(16) of the KVAT Act was turned down by us in batch cases. So far as penalty levied in this case is concerned, counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant applied for a certificate of ownership with counter signature of the officer which was declined by Ext.P5. Therefore, penalty could not have been levied for the violation is his contention. We do not think we should consider this because observations are made in the judgment to the effect that penalty for non-compliance of Circular issued by the Commissioner is one thing and penalty for tax evasion is another. It is, therefore, for the appellant to file statutory appeal against penalty order and the appellant can certainly rely on observations contained in the judgment. Since proceedings were pending in this court, appellant is granted another six weeks from today to file appeal and if appeal is filed against the penalty order as stated above, the 2 appellate authority will treat the same as one filed in time and dispose of the same on merits without any delay. The appeal is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge pms