IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35774 of 2008(H) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- MAHEEN.J, PROPRIETOR, BISMILLAHI AGENCIES, BALARAMAPURAM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (AA) COMMERCIAL TAXES, TRIVANDRUM. 2. KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 35774 OF 2008 U -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th December, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Ext.P1. Ext.P1 is an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. Complaint of the petitioner is that a perusal of Ext.P2 would show that opportunity under Section 22 (5) was denied and a notice was not issued under Section 22(4). Whatever that be, this Court has held in Supreme Electrical Engineering (Petitioner ) Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer (2008 (3) KLT 805) that when considering a stay application, the Appellate Authority must consider the contentions and a reasoned order must be passed. I would think that the impugned order falls foul of the said requirement and it must be quashed. Accordingly, Ext.P1 is quashed. A fresh order in accordance with law will be passed within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge WPC 2