IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28746 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.CHETHANA PHARMACEUTICALS, AMBALAKKAT ROAD, PERINTHALMANNA-679 322 REPRESENTED BY DAMODAR AVANOOR, PARTNER. BY ADV. MR.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASST.COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES SPECIAL CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 28746 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Against Ext.P1 assessment order passed under the Central Sales Tax Act, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P3 application for stay before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner submits that in Ext.P1, certain claim for reduced rate of tax as an inter-state sale has been rejected by the assessing authority on the ground that the petitioner has not produced C forms in respect of the same. The petitioner now submits that the petitioner has subsequently obtained C forms which has been produced before the appellate authority along with an application to receive the same in evidence. The petitioner submits that in the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent may be directed to consider Ext.P3 stay petition as also Exts.P4 and P5. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I am of opinion that it is a fit case were the 2nd respondent should consider Exts.P3 and P5 petitions W.P(C) No. 28746 of 2009 -2- expeditiously. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Exts.P3 and P5 petitions, as expeditiously as possible. Till disposal of the petitions, coercive proceedings for recovery of the tax disputed in Ext.P2 appeal shall be kept in abeyance. While considering the petitions, it would be open to the 2nd respondent to consider whether in view of the C forms now produced by the petitioner, the matter itself can be remanded to the assessing authority for considering the C forms. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs